Pub Date : 2018-10-02DOI: 10.1080/17449359.2018.1534596
Victoria Barnes, L. Newton
ABSTRACT Nation-states are not the only bodies to have invested in memory-building through the construction of war memorials. This article moves the analysis on from nation-states to firms. It undertakes an analysis of war memorials built by the Bank of England. At the close of World War I, the Bank of England was not yet a nationalized company. Yet, it still, like many other organizations, engaged in this process of memorialization. We show that businesses closely followed the habits of nation-states when it came to commemorating war. The building of monuments and the ceremonies, which took place around them, assigned values to the imagined communities, groups and nations. These events continue to the present day.
{"title":"War memorials in organizational memory: a case study of the Bank of England","authors":"Victoria Barnes, L. Newton","doi":"10.1080/17449359.2018.1534596","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17449359.2018.1534596","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Nation-states are not the only bodies to have invested in memory-building through the construction of war memorials. This article moves the analysis on from nation-states to firms. It undertakes an analysis of war memorials built by the Bank of England. At the close of World War I, the Bank of England was not yet a nationalized company. Yet, it still, like many other organizations, engaged in this process of memorialization. We show that businesses closely followed the habits of nation-states when it came to commemorating war. The building of monuments and the ceremonies, which took place around them, assigned values to the imagined communities, groups and nations. These events continue to the present day.","PeriodicalId":45724,"journal":{"name":"Management & Organizational History","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2018-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17449359.2018.1534596","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44978147","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-10-02DOI: 10.1080/17449359.2018.1547647
Nicholous M. Deal, Albert J. Mills, Jean Helms Mills
ABSTRACT This paper focuses on the impact of warfare, gender, and memory on the development of Imperial Airways (British Airways’ predecessor airline). Through a ‘close reading’ of archival materials and published histories, we examine how wartime experience prior, during, and following World War I came to shape the development of gendered organizational processes and practices in the airline’s emergent organizational culture from 1924–1939. Gender is theorized from a feminist poststructuralist position serving to problematize singular notions of power. Analysis of culture is explored through an ANTi-History and microhistorical approach revealing how history is produced and constitutes the ‘sense’ of organization. We examine how references to warfare are introduced into the narratives of Imperial Airways and its predecessor airlines, how warfare is utilized in the airline’s historical accounts, and how this influences our understanding of gender over time. Findings suggest two key aspects of memory at play. Memory of warfare is more embedded in cultural practices (e.g. piloting as male only) and symbolism (e.g. military-style pilots’ uniforms) than in extant narratives of the time. However, despite the Women’s Royal Air Force in 1918 and exploits of pre-war female flyers, women’s role in warfare was largely forgotten at all levels of the airline.
{"title":"Amodern and modern warfare in the making of a commercial airline","authors":"Nicholous M. Deal, Albert J. Mills, Jean Helms Mills","doi":"10.1080/17449359.2018.1547647","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17449359.2018.1547647","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This paper focuses on the impact of warfare, gender, and memory on the development of Imperial Airways (British Airways’ predecessor airline). Through a ‘close reading’ of archival materials and published histories, we examine how wartime experience prior, during, and following World War I came to shape the development of gendered organizational processes and practices in the airline’s emergent organizational culture from 1924–1939. Gender is theorized from a feminist poststructuralist position serving to problematize singular notions of power. Analysis of culture is explored through an ANTi-History and microhistorical approach revealing how history is produced and constitutes the ‘sense’ of organization. We examine how references to warfare are introduced into the narratives of Imperial Airways and its predecessor airlines, how warfare is utilized in the airline’s historical accounts, and how this influences our understanding of gender over time. Findings suggest two key aspects of memory at play. Memory of warfare is more embedded in cultural practices (e.g. piloting as male only) and symbolism (e.g. military-style pilots’ uniforms) than in extant narratives of the time. However, despite the Women’s Royal Air Force in 1918 and exploits of pre-war female flyers, women’s role in warfare was largely forgotten at all levels of the airline.","PeriodicalId":45724,"journal":{"name":"Management & Organizational History","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2018-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17449359.2018.1547647","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"60424019","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-10-01DOI: 10.1080/17449359.2018.1525405
S. Vincent
ABSTRACT Organizations fall back on their identities in times of uncertainty as a way of making sense of unfamiliar situations and to reflect on their values in the face of attack. Identity formation is inextricably linked to memory, both that of the individual organization and its members and the collective memory of the society in which it functions. The collective memory of the United States holds wartime service in high esteem, and for an organization facing hardship, this can open the door to an opportunity to build goodwill by linking identity to that narrative for an external audience. In this article, I analyze a case study of the Onondaga Pottery in World War II using the concept of social memory assets (SMAs) to see how management created an SMA based on the memory of their contributions to the war effort and deployed it as a tool when threatened by cuts in tariff rates during the Cold War. I demonstrate that SMAs can be used not only to proactively create a competitive advantage for an organization but as a defensive strategy as well.
{"title":"Social memory assets as a defense mechanism: the Onondaga Pottery in World War II","authors":"S. Vincent","doi":"10.1080/17449359.2018.1525405","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17449359.2018.1525405","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Organizations fall back on their identities in times of uncertainty as a way of making sense of unfamiliar situations and to reflect on their values in the face of attack. Identity formation is inextricably linked to memory, both that of the individual organization and its members and the collective memory of the society in which it functions. The collective memory of the United States holds wartime service in high esteem, and for an organization facing hardship, this can open the door to an opportunity to build goodwill by linking identity to that narrative for an external audience. In this article, I analyze a case study of the Onondaga Pottery in World War II using the concept of social memory assets (SMAs) to see how management created an SMA based on the memory of their contributions to the war effort and deployed it as a tool when threatened by cuts in tariff rates during the Cold War. I demonstrate that SMAs can be used not only to proactively create a competitive advantage for an organization but as a defensive strategy as well.","PeriodicalId":45724,"journal":{"name":"Management & Organizational History","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2018-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17449359.2018.1525405","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46380784","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-09-04DOI: 10.1080/17449359.2018.1465826
N. White
ABSTRACT John Hay was one of Britain’s leading colonial capitalists, building his career from the 1900s to the 1960s in Malaya’s plantation industry. He became the leading spokesperson for the British rubber growers, and played a major role in the formulation of international restriction schemes during the 1930s. Hay was a remarkable entrepreneurial talent, consolidating his corporate power through the premiere Malayan agency house, Guthrie & Co. This in itself challenges the notion that Britain’s myriad of ‘free-standing’ companies, which were typical of direct investment in the Empire, represented a relatively weak and unsustainable form of multinational enterprise. But Hay’s dominance of the Malayan plantation sector also questions the notion of ‘gentlemanly capitalism’ as the driving force behind the expansion and sustenance of the British imperial system. Hay’s network of colonial corporate influence did not extend into the corridors of ‘gentlemanly capitalist’ power in Whitehall and the City, where he often had frosty relations. Ultimately, it was the financial sector in London that brought about Hay’s forced resignation from Guthrie in 1963. Examining questions of class, ethnicity, personality, ideology and strategy, the article focuses on why Hay did not develop better relations with commercial, financial and official elites, issues that would also engender tensions with the post-colonial political and business leadership of Malaya/Malaysia.
{"title":"‘Ungentlemanly capitalism’: John Hay and Malaya, 1904–1964","authors":"N. White","doi":"10.1080/17449359.2018.1465826","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17449359.2018.1465826","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT John Hay was one of Britain’s leading colonial capitalists, building his career from the 1900s to the 1960s in Malaya’s plantation industry. He became the leading spokesperson for the British rubber growers, and played a major role in the formulation of international restriction schemes during the 1930s. Hay was a remarkable entrepreneurial talent, consolidating his corporate power through the premiere Malayan agency house, Guthrie & Co. This in itself challenges the notion that Britain’s myriad of ‘free-standing’ companies, which were typical of direct investment in the Empire, represented a relatively weak and unsustainable form of multinational enterprise. But Hay’s dominance of the Malayan plantation sector also questions the notion of ‘gentlemanly capitalism’ as the driving force behind the expansion and sustenance of the British imperial system. Hay’s network of colonial corporate influence did not extend into the corridors of ‘gentlemanly capitalist’ power in Whitehall and the City, where he often had frosty relations. Ultimately, it was the financial sector in London that brought about Hay’s forced resignation from Guthrie in 1963. Examining questions of class, ethnicity, personality, ideology and strategy, the article focuses on why Hay did not develop better relations with commercial, financial and official elites, issues that would also engender tensions with the post-colonial political and business leadership of Malaya/Malaysia.","PeriodicalId":45724,"journal":{"name":"Management & Organizational History","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2018-09-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17449359.2018.1465826","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45555480","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-07-03DOI: 10.1080/17449359.2018.1547646
M. Olavarría-Gambi
ABSTRACT Applying the documental historical and hermeneutical methods as well as the policy process perspective, this article analyzes why and how the government machinery change. The analysis focuses on the modernization of public management and State reform, which occurred in Chile in the 1920s. It concludes that when dealing with changes in government organization and/or structure, management and organizational studies converge with analysis of policy change, particularly with the policy formulation process. Information on the issue comes from presidential addresses, bills sent to Congress, parliamentary discussions, press clippings, publications of interest groups and academic literature.
{"title":"Public management and organizational reform in a historical perspective: the case of Chile’s State reform and public management modernization of 1920s","authors":"M. Olavarría-Gambi","doi":"10.1080/17449359.2018.1547646","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17449359.2018.1547646","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Applying the documental historical and hermeneutical methods as well as the policy process perspective, this article analyzes why and how the government machinery change. The analysis focuses on the modernization of public management and State reform, which occurred in Chile in the 1920s. It concludes that when dealing with changes in government organization and/or structure, management and organizational studies converge with analysis of policy change, particularly with the policy formulation process. Information on the issue comes from presidential addresses, bills sent to Congress, parliamentary discussions, press clippings, publications of interest groups and academic literature.","PeriodicalId":45724,"journal":{"name":"Management & Organizational History","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2018-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17449359.2018.1547646","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47142947","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-07-03DOI: 10.1080/17449359.2018.1550286
Peter Miskell
One of the perks of being a journal editor are the occasional invitations to travel to interesting locations to meet with informed and insightful colleagues to discuss current trends in our academic discipline. One such event, recently hosted by Copenhagen Business School, provided an opportunity for scholars from a range of disciplinary (and national) backgrounds to share their perspectives on the way in which history is being integrated with other business school disciplines – most notably organization studies. This is clearly a topic of particular interest for our journal, positioned as it is at the intersection on management history and organizational theory. Contributors to Management and Organizational History (MOH) have, of course, helped to lead the way in promoting a ‘historical turn’ in organization studies (Clark and Rowlinson 2004; Booth and Rowlinson 2006; Mills et al. 2016), and the last decade has witnessed an increasingly productive dialogue between researchers working in these two disciplinary areas. This is reflected in the publication of historically themed special issues of mainstream management (Godfrey et al. 2016; Wadhwani et al. 2018; Argyres et al. 2017; Wadhwani et al. 2016), as well as the variety of papers that have sought to map out the different ways in which history and management theory are being combined (Kipping and Usdiken 2014; Rowlinson, Hassard, and Decker 2014; Maclean, Harvey, and Clegg 2016; Zundel, Holt, and Popp 2016; Decker 2016; Foster et al. 2017). In the light of this emerging literature, and the discussion it has generated at various recent business history workshops and conferences, this would seem to be an opportune moment to proffer some editorial comments on the way in which historical and theoretical approaches can be accommodated within the pages of MOH. As Decker (2016) points out, a distinct trend in the literature on this topic has been to move beyond ‘supplementarist’ approaches, which tend to place history in a subordinate role – essentially supplying data in order to test or refine theory. Rather, emphasis has tilted toward what Üsdiken and Kieser (2004) referred to as ‘integrationist’ approaches, in which history and theory meet on equal terms, each informing and supporting the other. If the goal of mutually beneficial integration is widely shared, there is rather less consensus about what this actually looks like in practice. Kipping and Üsdiken (2014) differentiate between what they call ‘history-in-theory’ (in which a temporal dimension is built into theoretical modeling) and ‘historical cognizance’ (in which theorizing takes account not just of time, but of historical context.) Maclean, Harvey, and Clegg (2016), in a similar vein, call for integrative studies that meet the threshold of ‘dual integrity’ by achieving legitimacy in the eyes of both theorists and historians. But is such a standard of ‘dual integrity’ realistically achievable? Maclean et al. highlight some important diff
作为期刊编辑的好处之一是偶尔被邀请去有趣的地方，与见多识广、有见地的同事讨论我们学术领域的当前趋势。哥本哈根商学院(Copenhagen Business School)最近举办了一场这样的活动，为来自不同学科(和国家)背景的学者提供了一个机会，让他们就历史与商学院其他学科(尤其是组织研究)整合的方式分享自己的观点。这显然是我们杂志特别感兴趣的话题，因为它处于管理历史和组织理论的交叉点。当然，管理和组织历史(MOH)的贡献者在推动组织研究的“历史转向”方面起到了带头作用(Clark and Rowlinson 2004;Booth and Rowlinson 2006;Mills et al. 2016)，过去十年见证了这两个学科领域的研究人员之间越来越富有成效的对话。这体现在以历史为主题的主流管理特刊的出版上(Godfrey et al. 2016;Wadhwani et al. 2018;Argyres et al. 2017;Wadhwani et al. 2016)，以及各种试图描绘历史和管理理论相结合的不同方式的论文(Kipping and Usdiken 2014;罗林森，哈萨德，德克尔2014;Maclean, Harvey, and Clegg 2016;Zundel, Holt, and Popp 2016;德克尔2016;Foster et al. 2017)。鉴于这一新兴文献，以及它在最近各种商业历史研讨会和会议上产生的讨论，这似乎是一个提供一些关于历史和理论方法可以在卫生部页面中容纳的方式的编辑评论的时机。正如Decker(2016)所指出的那样，关于这一主题的文献中有一个明显的趋势是超越了“补充主义”的方法，这种方法往往将历史置于从属地位——本质上是提供数据以检验或完善理论。相反，重点已经倾向于Üsdiken和Kieser(2004)所说的“整合主义”方法，在这种方法中，历史和理论以平等的条件相遇，相互提供信息和支持。如果互利一体化的目标得到广泛认同，那么在实践中，人们对这一目标的实际情况却很少达成共识。Kipping和Üsdiken(2014)区分了他们所谓的“理论上的历史”(其中时间维度被构建到理论模型中)和“历史认知”(其中理论化不仅考虑时间，而且考虑历史背景)。Maclean、Harvey和Clegg(2016)以类似的方式呼吁进行整合研究，通过在理论家和历史学家眼中获得合法性来满足“双重完整性”的门槛。但是这样的“双重诚信”标准实际上是可以实现的吗?Maclean等人强调了历史学家和管理理论家典型工作方式(以及他们所重视的工作类型)的一些重要差异。罗林森，哈萨德，和管理与组织历史2018年，第13卷，NO. 13。3, 213-219 https://doi.org/10.1080/17449359.2018.1550286
{"title":"Reflections on the integration of history and organization studies","authors":"Peter Miskell","doi":"10.1080/17449359.2018.1550286","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17449359.2018.1550286","url":null,"abstract":"One of the perks of being a journal editor are the occasional invitations to travel to interesting locations to meet with informed and insightful colleagues to discuss current trends in our academic discipline. One such event, recently hosted by Copenhagen Business School, provided an opportunity for scholars from a range of disciplinary (and national) backgrounds to share their perspectives on the way in which history is being integrated with other business school disciplines – most notably organization studies. This is clearly a topic of particular interest for our journal, positioned as it is at the intersection on management history and organizational theory. Contributors to Management and Organizational History (MOH) have, of course, helped to lead the way in promoting a ‘historical turn’ in organization studies (Clark and Rowlinson 2004; Booth and Rowlinson 2006; Mills et al. 2016), and the last decade has witnessed an increasingly productive dialogue between researchers working in these two disciplinary areas. This is reflected in the publication of historically themed special issues of mainstream management (Godfrey et al. 2016; Wadhwani et al. 2018; Argyres et al. 2017; Wadhwani et al. 2016), as well as the variety of papers that have sought to map out the different ways in which history and management theory are being combined (Kipping and Usdiken 2014; Rowlinson, Hassard, and Decker 2014; Maclean, Harvey, and Clegg 2016; Zundel, Holt, and Popp 2016; Decker 2016; Foster et al. 2017). In the light of this emerging literature, and the discussion it has generated at various recent business history workshops and conferences, this would seem to be an opportune moment to proffer some editorial comments on the way in which historical and theoretical approaches can be accommodated within the pages of MOH. As Decker (2016) points out, a distinct trend in the literature on this topic has been to move beyond ‘supplementarist’ approaches, which tend to place history in a subordinate role – essentially supplying data in order to test or refine theory. Rather, emphasis has tilted toward what Üsdiken and Kieser (2004) referred to as ‘integrationist’ approaches, in which history and theory meet on equal terms, each informing and supporting the other. If the goal of mutually beneficial integration is widely shared, there is rather less consensus about what this actually looks like in practice. Kipping and Üsdiken (2014) differentiate between what they call ‘history-in-theory’ (in which a temporal dimension is built into theoretical modeling) and ‘historical cognizance’ (in which theorizing takes account not just of time, but of historical context.) Maclean, Harvey, and Clegg (2016), in a similar vein, call for integrative studies that meet the threshold of ‘dual integrity’ by achieving legitimacy in the eyes of both theorists and historians. But is such a standard of ‘dual integrity’ realistically achievable? Maclean et al. highlight some important diff","PeriodicalId":45724,"journal":{"name":"Management & Organizational History","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2018-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17449359.2018.1550286","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47727525","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-07-03DOI: 10.1080/17449359.2018.1547645
Ida Lunde Jørgensen
ABSTRACT The paper addresses the larger question of how cultural heritage becomes taken for granted focusing on how cultural value becomes assigned. This is illustrated by taking departure in the case of Carl Jacobsen, an élite philanthropist, owner and founder of the New Carlsberg brewery, who came to have a profound effect on Danish cultural heritage through the establishment of the museum The New Carlsberg Glyptotek and the New Carlsberg Foundation in Copenhagen. Using archival sources, the paper investigates the mechanisms by which cultural value is assigned, conceptualizing these through framing, canonization and consecration. The paper shows the prominence of each mechanism with vignettes from the early work of Carl Jacobsen, to the contemporary work of the New Carlsberg Glyptotek and the New Carlsberg Foundation. In doing so, the paper sheds light on the managerial and organizational processes of cultural meaning-making as well as the way in which élite philanthropy may directly and indirectly influence the cultural heritage of a nation.
{"title":"Creating cultural heritage: three vignettes on Carl Jacobsen, his museum and foundation","authors":"Ida Lunde Jørgensen","doi":"10.1080/17449359.2018.1547645","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17449359.2018.1547645","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The paper addresses the larger question of how cultural heritage becomes taken for granted focusing on how cultural value becomes assigned. This is illustrated by taking departure in the case of Carl Jacobsen, an élite philanthropist, owner and founder of the New Carlsberg brewery, who came to have a profound effect on Danish cultural heritage through the establishment of the museum The New Carlsberg Glyptotek and the New Carlsberg Foundation in Copenhagen. Using archival sources, the paper investigates the mechanisms by which cultural value is assigned, conceptualizing these through framing, canonization and consecration. The paper shows the prominence of each mechanism with vignettes from the early work of Carl Jacobsen, to the contemporary work of the New Carlsberg Glyptotek and the New Carlsberg Foundation. In doing so, the paper sheds light on the managerial and organizational processes of cultural meaning-making as well as the way in which élite philanthropy may directly and indirectly influence the cultural heritage of a nation.","PeriodicalId":45724,"journal":{"name":"Management & Organizational History","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2018-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17449359.2018.1547645","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46989016","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-07-03DOI: 10.1080/17449359.2018.1547648
P. Donzé, Andrew D Smith
ABSTRACT Scholarly works on rhetorical history have inspired the production of an extensive body of research on how firms use history. However, the existing research is based on the experience of firms in a handful of Western countries. Our mixed-methods paper examines the use of history by Japanese firms so that we can see how history is used in a very different institutional and cultural context. The paper operationalizes the comparative capitalism approach. For more than a century, Japanese firms have invested extensively in celebratory corporate histories called shashi. The paper is based on bibliometric and interview data as well as the close textual analysis of shashi from various decades. We show that until recently the main function of shashi was to inspire loyalty on the part of workers. We argue that the post-2000 decline in shashi production is primarily a function of profound changes in the nature of the Japanese variety of capitalism. The relation between the change in governance and the use of corporate history is revealed by the new style of consumer-focused shashi that has emerged since 2000.
{"title":"Varieties of capitalism and the corporate use of history: the Japanese experience","authors":"P. Donzé, Andrew D Smith","doi":"10.1080/17449359.2018.1547648","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17449359.2018.1547648","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Scholarly works on rhetorical history have inspired the production of an extensive body of research on how firms use history. However, the existing research is based on the experience of firms in a handful of Western countries. Our mixed-methods paper examines the use of history by Japanese firms so that we can see how history is used in a very different institutional and cultural context. The paper operationalizes the comparative capitalism approach. For more than a century, Japanese firms have invested extensively in celebratory corporate histories called shashi. The paper is based on bibliometric and interview data as well as the close textual analysis of shashi from various decades. We show that until recently the main function of shashi was to inspire loyalty on the part of workers. We argue that the post-2000 decline in shashi production is primarily a function of profound changes in the nature of the Japanese variety of capitalism. The relation between the change in governance and the use of corporate history is revealed by the new style of consumer-focused shashi that has emerged since 2000.","PeriodicalId":45724,"journal":{"name":"Management & Organizational History","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2018-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17449359.2018.1547648","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44402242","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-07-03DOI: 10.1080/17449359.2018.1534597
P. Edwards
ABSTRACT Most accounts of corporate failure offer explanation in terms of fundamental changes in the environment or strategic inertia. The case of Lucas Industries is different: a firm that was actively restructuring itself but still lost its 100-year-old identity in 1996 as a result of a merger. The firm actively pursued the merger but found that the smaller merger partner in fact became dominant. Comparative analysis with other firms, together with interrogation of the results of three studies of the firm over the period 1978–95, points to a threefold explanation: (1) some weaknesses in the restructuring strategy which were brought into focus by (2) an economic downturn and belief at the time in the rationalization of the industry into fewer firms and amplified by (3) some specific contingencies in parts of the firm. The analytical lesson is that failure can be more historically contingent than extant accounts recognize. The practical one is to urge more independent scrutiny of the decisions of company boards.
{"title":"The contingencies of corporate failure: the case of Lucas industries","authors":"P. Edwards","doi":"10.1080/17449359.2018.1534597","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17449359.2018.1534597","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Most accounts of corporate failure offer explanation in terms of fundamental changes in the environment or strategic inertia. The case of Lucas Industries is different: a firm that was actively restructuring itself but still lost its 100-year-old identity in 1996 as a result of a merger. The firm actively pursued the merger but found that the smaller merger partner in fact became dominant. Comparative analysis with other firms, together with interrogation of the results of three studies of the firm over the period 1978–95, points to a threefold explanation: (1) some weaknesses in the restructuring strategy which were brought into focus by (2) an economic downturn and belief at the time in the rationalization of the industry into fewer firms and amplified by (3) some specific contingencies in parts of the firm. The analytical lesson is that failure can be more historically contingent than extant accounts recognize. The practical one is to urge more independent scrutiny of the decisions of company boards.","PeriodicalId":45724,"journal":{"name":"Management & Organizational History","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2018-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17449359.2018.1534597","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48019629","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-04-03DOI: 10.1080/17449359.2018.1530846
Gabriel Galvez-Behar, A. Guagnini, Joris Mercelis, R. Wadhwani
ABSTRACT Responding to the commentators on the two special issues (in Management and Organizational History and in History and Technology) devoted to academic entrepreneurship in historical perspective, we renew our invitation to adopt a broad definition of the term entrepreneurship, and elaborate on our view that it can be a heuristically valid tool in the analysis of historical change in the academic, political, and social worlds. We agree, in particular, that more research needs to be carried out on the relationships between the institutional and commercial aspects of entrepreneurship in academia, and how the two aspects coalesced into forms of “organized entrepreneurship” at the university level. Particularly promising in this regard would be historical research on the interdependencies between entrepreneurial processes at the individual and organizational levels, the changing roles of administrative officers and governing bodies of institutions of higher education, and shifts in the regulation of academics’ outside activities. Studies of the changing ways that business people and organizations integrate academic knowledge into products and enterprises in collaboration with academic partners would also contribute to this research agenda. For all the obstacles and difficulties arising from differences of interpretation across disciplines, interdisciplinary scholarship between history and the social sciences remains promising as a way to engage in research on the evolution of academic entrepreneurship, as well as an effective way to question the relevance of our concepts in our own disciplines.
{"title":"Definitions, interactions and beyond: response to Carlson, Galambos, Musselin and Wright","authors":"Gabriel Galvez-Behar, A. Guagnini, Joris Mercelis, R. Wadhwani","doi":"10.1080/17449359.2018.1530846","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17449359.2018.1530846","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Responding to the commentators on the two special issues (in Management and Organizational History and in History and Technology) devoted to academic entrepreneurship in historical perspective, we renew our invitation to adopt a broad definition of the term entrepreneurship, and elaborate on our view that it can be a heuristically valid tool in the analysis of historical change in the academic, political, and social worlds. We agree, in particular, that more research needs to be carried out on the relationships between the institutional and commercial aspects of entrepreneurship in academia, and how the two aspects coalesced into forms of “organized entrepreneurship” at the university level. Particularly promising in this regard would be historical research on the interdependencies between entrepreneurial processes at the individual and organizational levels, the changing roles of administrative officers and governing bodies of institutions of higher education, and shifts in the regulation of academics’ outside activities. Studies of the changing ways that business people and organizations integrate academic knowledge into products and enterprises in collaboration with academic partners would also contribute to this research agenda. For all the obstacles and difficulties arising from differences of interpretation across disciplines, interdisciplinary scholarship between history and the social sciences remains promising as a way to engage in research on the evolution of academic entrepreneurship, as well as an effective way to question the relevance of our concepts in our own disciplines.","PeriodicalId":45724,"journal":{"name":"Management & Organizational History","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2018-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17449359.2018.1530846","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42410077","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：