Radical Business? Business and the Contest over Social Norms

4 06 2019

I’m sharing some information about a business-historical workshop that will take place in Oxford on 28 June 2019.

Conveners: David Chan Smith and Rowena Olegario

This one-day symposium at the Weston Library brings together an interdisciplinary group of speakers to offer insights into how business has acted as a radical force to upset and replace social norms over time. Whether seeking to normalize new products and services, such as autonomous vehicles, or reacting to environmental or safety concerns, business is engaged in a constant negotiation with larger cultural codes. Speakers will discuss the consequences of this contest over social norms, including ethical as well as strategic implications. By bringing together researchers from across disciplines, the symposium will also explore common conceptual ground to understand the significance of this problem for the history of capitalism and management.

All are welcome to attend, but please RSVP.

David Chan Smith is Associate Professor, Department of History, Wilfrid Laurier University, and is the Royal Bank of Canada-Bodleian Visiting Fellow at the Bodleian Libraries during Trinity Term 2019.

Presented in association with the Bodleian Libraries Centre for the Study of the Book.

Confirmed speakers:

Aled Davies, University of Oxford
Stephanie Decker, Aston University
Neil Forbes, Coventry University
James Hollis, University of Oxford
Mary Johnstone-Louise, University of Oxford
Alan Morrison, University of Oxford
Anne Murphy, University of Hertfordshire
Adam Nix, De Montfort University
Will Pettigrew, University of Lancaster
David Chan Smith, Wilfrid Laurier University
Heidi Tworek, University of British Columbia
Michael Weatherburn, Imperial College London
Lola Wilhelm, University of Oxford

 





AoM 2019 Management History Division News

3 06 2019

aom2019regopen_719x226

 

For a number of years, I’ve been a member of the Management History Division of the Academy of Management. Each year, the MH division elects a new PDW Chair who will serve a five-year leadership rotation within the division—Year 1: PDW Chair; Year 2: Program Chair; Year 3: Division Chair Elect; Year 4: Division Chair; Year 5: Past/Outgoing Division Chair. This year, we also had positions open for Division Representative-at-Large and Division Graduate Student/Junior Faculty Representative-at-Large.

I am very happy to report that I was elected to one of these offices. Patricia McLaren and Nick Deal were also elected.
Patricia McLaren, Wilfrid Laurier University (Canada)—PDW Chair

Andrew Smith, University of Liverpool Management School (UK)—Division Representative-at-Large

Nicholous (Nick) Deal, Saint Mary’s University (Canada)—Division Graduate Student/Junior Faculty Representative-at-Large.

I’m really looking forward to the upcoming AoM conference in Boston.

 

 





What Business History Has to Say about Huawei, Geopolitical Jockeying, and the Battle to Sell Americans 5G Equipment

16 05 2019

In this blog post, I’m going to show how the research of two business historians is relevant to understanding the ongoing controversy about Huawei. The Chinese company Huawei is in the news again, thanks to Donald Trump signing a presidential order that declared that Chinese exports of telecoms equipment to the United States constitute both a national security threat and a national “emergency.” Given that Trump previously labelled Canadian and European steel exports to the U.S. a threat to national security, it is not surprising that the justification for the U.S. government’s attack on Huawei is not being taken seriously. As the BBC reported this morning, Trump’s executive order is “widely seen” as an attack on Huawei, a firm whose 5G products are competing with those of two European manufacturers, Ericsson and Nokia, and Samsung, a South Korean firm. For this interpretation of Trump’s executive order, see here, here, and here.

The French president, Macron, has rightly called Trump’s attitude to the Chinese firm “overprotectionism”. Many experts who have compared the Huawei’s products with those of its non-Chinese rivals have concluded that  Huawei’s equipment is smaller, more cost effective, and more energy efficient than equivalent products from its competitors, which implies that the U.S. consumers will lose out from the ban on Huawei products.

The immediate winners of Trump’s move would appear to be the U.S. subsidiaries of Ericsson, Samsung, and Nokia. As of yet, there is no direct evidence that any of these companies were involved in making Americans concerned about  Huawei. There’s no proof that these companies paid U.S. journalists or Congressmen to adopt anti-China, anti- Huawei stances, but that’s not unthinkable. I would note that when Borje Ekholm, the CEO of Ericsson, was asked about Trump’s executive order, he was remarkably restrained and did not join in the Huawei-bashing.  However, there is rising Sinophobia in the U.S. and that’s good news, at least in the short term, for the shareholders of Ericsson, Samsung, and Nokia, Huawei’s rivals, as well as for domestic U.S. firms competing with Chinese imports.(The US doesn’t have any companies that make 5G equipment).

 

This episode is certainly not the first historical instance of third-country firms benefitting from rising tensions between two countries. In the early twentieth century, the emergence of the movement for independent in India prompted many Indian firms and consumers to shun British-made goods. As the business historians Christina Lubinski and  Dan Wadhwani  discuss this dynamic in their new SMJ paper “Geopolitical jockeying: Economic nationalism and multinational strategy in historical perspective”. Their paper introduces the concept of “geopolitical jockeying” which is when a multinational firm attempts to delegitimize rival multinationals and position themselves as complementary to the economic and political goals of the host nation. I know that many business historians will tend to view the Huawei with relation to the wider trade war between the United States and China and the literature on the history of trade wars However, in thinking about the Huawei saga, I find it more useful to use the concept of  geopolitical jockeying.





Reflections on the Uses of the Past in International Economic Relations Conference

10 05 2019

I immensely enjoyed the Uses of the Past in International Economic Relations conference here in Oxford. The conference began with a great keynote by Per Hansen followed by a series of excellent papers. The first day ended with me talking about how historical analysis can help senior managers to mitigate cognitive biases, promote long-term thinking, and ultimately increase earnings per share. My presentation generated a lively discussion and I got lots of feedback that will be useful in preparing the paper for submission. On the second day, I heard a variety of excellent papers. I found that the paper on the ECB by Anselm Kuesters was particularly methodologically innovative. I also heard a fantastic presentation by a young economic historian that was based on research in the archive of Stanford University, which now holds the records of the Foreign Bondholders Protective Council.

At the conference, I learned of a new book by Marc Flandreau that I need to order and read.

The conference included an excursion to Brasenose College, where I drank out of a silver tankard that had been manufactured in the seventeenth century. The date on the tankard reads 1659, which I was told is implausible given that the college lost all of its silver under Cromwell’s rule. Archival research has confirmed that the tankard existed by the 1680s but for some reason its creators wanted to backdate it to the year after Cromwell died and the college’s silver was returned. Anyway, drinking from a silver tankard is an interesting experience, because the container cools the drink down after you pour it in.

I express my gratitude to the conference organizers for including my paper and to the European Commission for funding the conference.





Policy Entrepreneurs and FDI Attraction: Canada’s Auto Industry

7 05 2019

I thought I would draw the attention of my readers to a new paper in the journal Enterprise and Society by Greig Mordue of McMaster University.

Abstract: New perspective is provided on a critical period in the development of the Canadian automotive industry. In the 1980s, five foreign manufacturers built new vehicle assembly operations in Canada, effectively transforming that country’s automotive industry. Drawing from a combination of interviews with key actors and a review of archives, this case study makes several contributions. First, gaps are closed in the economic history of one of Canada’s most important industries. Second, the case demonstrates the capacity of using historical perspective to extend an existing theory to a new area of inquiry. In this case, Multiple Streams Theory is employed to explain the process of inward FDI attraction. This includes a description of the role of policy entrepreneurs and their capacity to create and exploit opportunities. Third, the case demonstrates the continuing relevance of integrating historical perspective to contemporary issues in business, management, and public policy.

Even though I’m not a fan of the concept of “policy entrepreneur,” which is used by this author (and many others), this paper is an excellent piece of historical research. The author, Greig Mordue, did a PhD in business history at Strathclyde Business School in Glasgow.  He is now an associate professor and ArcelorMittal Dofasco Chair in Advanced Manufacturing Policy at McMaster University.





Belgium’s historic beer diversity: should we raise a pint to institutions?

2 05 2019

Belgian Beers

Eline Poelmans and Jason E. Taylor. “Belgium’s historic beer diversity: should we raise a pint to institutions?.” Journal of Institutional Economics (2019): 1-19.

Despite its relatively small size, Belgium has historically been considered to have the most diverse array of beer varieties in the world. We explore whether Belgium’s institutional history has contributed to its beer diversity. The Belgian area has experienced a heterogeneous and variable array of institutional regimes over the last millennia. In many cases institutional borders crossed through the Belgian area. We trace the historical development of many of Belgium’s well-known beer varieties to specific institutional causes. We also show that the geographic production of important varieties, such as Old Brown, Red Brown, Trappist, Lambic, Saison, and Gruitbeer, continues to be influenced by Belgium’s institutional past.

EGOS 2019 paper Smith Online Appendix





Capitalism and Violence: A Short History by Sven Beckert, Harvard University

30 04 2019

AS: The lens with which I observe historical phenomena differs considerably from that of Sven Beckert, but I am always interested in listening to what he has to say. Next month, he will be presented in Copenhagen about the relationship between violence and capitalism. My priors, which are much more like those of Pinker, strongly suggest to me that the rise of capitalism has produced a reduction in the overall rate of violence, but I am certain curious to learn more about Sven Beckert’s presentation on this subject, which will likely argue that there is a causative relationship between capitalism development and violence. Anyway, here are the details of his talk.    

Professor Beckert researches and teaches the history of the United States in the nineteenth century, with a particular emphasis on the history of capitalism, including its economic, social, political and transnational dimensions. He just published Empire of Cotton: A Global History, the first global history of the nineteenth century’s most important commodity. The book won the Bancroft Award, The Philip Taft Award, the Cundill Recognition for Excellence and was a finalist for the Pulitzer Prize. The New York Times named it one of the ten most important books of 2015. His other publications have focused on the nineteenth-century bourgeoisie, on labor, on democracy, on global history and on the connections between slavery and capitalism. Currently he is at work on a history of capitalism. Beckert teaches courses on the political economy of modern capitalism, the history of American capitalism, Gilded Age America, labor history, global capitalism and the history of European capitalism. Together with a group of students he has also worked on the historical connections between Harvard and slavery and published Harvard and Slavery: Seeking a Forgotten History.

Beckert is co-chair of the Program on the Study of Capitalism at Harvard University , and co-chair of theWeatherhead Initiative on Global History (WIGH). Beyond Harvard, he co-chairs an international study group on global history, is co-editor of a series of books at Princeton University Press on “America in the World,” and has co-organized a series of conferences on the history of capitalism. He is a 2011 Guggenheim Fellow. He also directs the Harvard College Europe Program.

 

Date: 14th May 201

Time: 11.00 – 12.15

Venue: Udvælgseværelse  3, Nørregdae

 

Registration is required. Send a mail to Sofie Rosa Mønster  qdp332@hum.ku.dk  





CfP on History and Business Storytelling

29 04 2019

Steph's avatarOrganizational History Network

Call for Papers on History and Business Storytelling

Volume Editor: Albert J. Mills (albert.mills@smu.ca)

  As part of the series “A World Scientific Encyclopedia of Business Storytelling” (edited by David Boje and Regents Professor), contributions are sought for a proposed volume on History and Business Storytelling (with a submissions delivery date of January 15, 2021).

In the words of David Boje, the overall series seeks “to extend new theories of prospective sensemaking, quantum storytelling (how humans are connected to the environment, not separate), and the relation of narrative-counter narrative dialectics to dialogic webs of multiplicity.” To that end, the series seeks “new business story paradigms that go beyond mere social constructivism, short-term shareholder wealth maximization, and disembodied textual narratives to the work in embodiment, critical accounts for the voiceless and marginalized, socioeconomic storytelling for socially responsible capitalism, and true storytelling principles as an alternative to fake news…

View original post 2,041 more words





Business History Special Issue on Gender and Feminism

26 04 2019
I’m very pleased to share this CfP for a special issue that seeks to integrate research on gender and diversity into business history. I genuinely believe that such research, which is inherently important, can also help to increase the competitive advantage of business history as a field. 
Business History welcomes proposals for a Special Issue Gender, Feminism, and Business History.
Deadline: January 15, 2020
Gender relations represent one of the most significant social issues of modernity, profoundly affecting both women and men’s educational, economic, and political lives. Feminist theory and activism during the last two centuries is the highest profile marker of this, shaping our understanding of gender relations by focusing on equality, social justice, discrimination, inclusion/exclusion, and latterly the intersection of gender with race and ethnicity. The established territory of business history is the global north, after the mid-19th century, focusing on industrial production companies. Despite the changes provoked by feminism and greater recognition of the material and symbolic importance of gender relations, business history as a field maintains a largely gender-free and feminism-free centre. This special issue is designed to change that, by bringing both gender and feminism from the periphery of business history to its centre.
Gendered analysis of business history is a considerable field, but perhaps the most prominent challenge it has mounted to date is to the straightforward narratives of great men founding and building large organizations. The simple ‘great man’ narrative may still be a significant staple of the research undertaken in the field, but it is only one possible approach among many. There is empirical and conceptual space for other, very different, narratives of business history and the history of business.
This special issue is the first in this field for almost a decade to be dedicated to gender and business and/or organizational history. With it, we want to create a space for research that brings gender and feminism to business history’s centre, to provoke further dialogue and debate about alternative frameworks for research within and beyond the issue itself. We expect contributions to accomplish either or both of the following  aims:
To explore the significance of feminist theories and gender in advancing the analysis and understanding of women in particular as business owners, entrepreneurs, or as funders, silent partners, and designers supporting more visible business activity by men; To advance understanding of women and men working or living on the margins of the established territory of business history – i.e. outside of the global north, before the mid-19th century, outside of established industries, and as critics of masculinised ways of doing business.
In order to develop these broad aims, and in keeping with the aims of Business History, contributions to the Special Issue might explore (but is not limited to) the following topics:
  • What source materials and archives might offer a more complete understanding of women and feminism in business history?
  • What are the implications of changes occurring in the archive profession, and other developments such as the increase in feminist archiving?
  • How can gender and feminist perspectives shed new light on the historical analysis of social structures including social, economic and political systems as well as power?
  • How can gender and feminist perspectives inform business history not only from a Western perspectives but also from other perspectives including outside of the Anglo-American bubble i,e, Latin America, Africa, and Asia?
  • How can gender and feminist perspectives inform business history before the 19th century?
  • How should the corporate archive and the firm, in particular, be interpreted when thinking about gender, feminism, and business history?
  • What changes to research questions, methods, or narratives, are necessary to enable women and feminism to be more effectively written into business histories as full participants?
  • How can we account for the role that women played in creating the opportunities e.g. as funders, silent partners, or as designers for ‘great men’ to dominate business histories?
  • How can business history contribute to the conceptual development of key feminist analytics such as sexism, patriarchy, or misogyny?
  • How would a gendered analysis of business history classics contribute to our understanding of them? For example, what would a feminist re-reading of Alfred Chandler’s work tell us?
Contributions are expected to build on the rich empirical, analytical, and methodological traditions in this journal and in the field more generally. We would very much welcome contributions from scholars located beyond business and management Schools, interdisciplinary work, and from scholars geographically located outside the global north.
Submission Instructions
This call is open and competitive. All submissions will be peer reviewed following the standard practice of the journal. To be considered for this special issue, submissions must fit with the Aims and Scope of Business History, as well as this call for papers.
The guest editors will select a limited number of papers to be included in the special issue. Other papers submitted to the special issue may be considered for publication in other issues of the journal at the discretion of the Editor-in-Chief.
This special issue welcomes all contributions that address the broad themes described above. All submissions should be based on original research and innovative analysis. For empirical papers based on sources or data sets from which multiple papers have been generated, authors must provide the Guest Editors with copies of all other papers based on the same data or sources.
The maximum submission length is 10,000 words (including graphs and tables).
Submissions must not be under consideration with another journal.
The submission deadline is 15 January 2020 via ScholarOne, using the drop-down menu to indicate that the submission is to the Special Issue on Gender, Feminism, and Business History.
Please ensure that your manuscript fully complies with the publishing style of formatting regulation of Business History per their ‘Instructions for authors’
Authors may be asked to use an English language copyeditor before final acceptance.
The guest editors of this special issue would be happy to be contacted directly with queries relating to potential submissions:
Scott Taylor s.taylor@bham.ac.uk
Mary Yeager yeager@ucla.edu




Historical Organizational Studies at EGOS 2019

22 04 2019
I’m really looking forward to EGOS this year. EGOS is always a chance to meet up with old friends and learn about new research. This year, I’m part of a sub-theme on Realizing the Potential of Historical Organization Studies that looks particularly interesting to me, particularly as it includes a fair number of papers on rhetorical history in finance (one of my major research interests) and Canadian Indigenous communities (one of my minor research interests).
Stewart Clegg, University of Technology, Sydney, Australia
Mairi Maclean, University of Bath, United Kingdom
Roy Suddaby, University of Victoria, Canada
Session I: Thursday, July 04, 11:00 to 12:30
– Parallel Stream –
Parallel Stream A: Theory 1 – Room: UEBS – LT 1A
Chair: Roy Suddaby
Gabrielle Durepos and Russ Vince
Toward (an) historical reflexivity: Potential and practice
François Bastien, William Foster and Diego M. Coraiola
Historicizing strategy: Exploring differences in three Indigenous communities across Canada
Parallel Stream B: Theory 2 – Room: UEBS – Auditorium
Chair: Mairi Maclean
Alistair Mutch
Historical explorations of practices
Richard J. Badham, Todd Bridgman and Stephen Cummings
The organisation-as-iceberg metaphor: A strong defence for historical re-surfacing
Session II: Thursday, July 04, 14:00 to 15:30
– Parallel Stream –
Parallel Stream A: Institutional Entrepreneurship – Room: UEBS – LT 1A
Chair: Stewart Clegg
Parisa I. Baig and Andrew Godley
A new perspective on the paradox of embedded agency: Legitimacy and its acquisition in institutional entrepreneurship
Micki Eisenman and Tal Simons
A rising tide lifts all boats: The origins of institutionalized aesthetic innovation
Mairi Maclean, Charles Harvey and Roy Suddaby
Entrepreneurial agency and institutional change in the co-creation of the global hotel industry
Parallel Stream B: Rhetorical History 1 – Room: UEBS – Auditorium
Chair: Roy Suddaby
Henrik Koll and Kim Esmark
Rhetorical history as managerial strategizing: The past as an object of struggles during organizational change in a Scandinavian telecom
Eugene Choi, Ikujiro Nonaka and R. Daniel Wadhwani
Selfless quest for corporate-level oneness: Application of rhetorical history as an essential organizational praxis of wise leadership
Çetin Önder, Meltem Özge Özcanli and Sükrü Özen
When competitors are co-narrators: Contested rhetorical organizational history
Session III: Friday, July 05, 09:00 to 10:30
– Parallel Stream –
Parallel Stream A: Institutions – Room: UEBS – LT 1A
Chair: Charles Harvey
Pamela A. Popielarz
Organizational legacy and normativity in organizations
Natalia Korchagina
Disrupting oppressive institutions through memory: Interstitial events as catalysts of theofficial commemoration of alternative memories
Grégoire Croidieu, Birthe Soppe and Walter W. Powell
How contestation buttresses legitimacy: A historical analysis of the 1855 Bordeaux wine classification
Parallel Stream B: Rhetorical History 2 – Room: UEBS – Auditorium
Chair: Bill Foster
Simon Oertel, Franziska Hein, Karin Knorr and Kirsten Thommes
The application of rhetorical history in crafting an organizational identity
Stefanie Ruel, Linda Dyer and Albert J. Mills
Gendered rhetorical ‘histories’ and antenarratives: The women of the Canadian Alouette I and II satellites
John G.L. Millar
Rhetorical history and the competitive advantage of the Edinburgh fund management cluster
Session IV: Friday, July 05, 11:00 to 12:30
– Parallel Stream –
Parallel Stream A: Sources and Methods – Room: UEBS – LT 1A
Chair: Charles Harvey
Adam Nix and Stephanie Decker
Between sources and stuff: Using digital historical sources
Guy Huber, Andrea Bernardi and Ioanna Iordanou
Critical discourse analysis: At the intersection of sociology and historiography
Andrew Smith
Corporate archives, history as sensemaking, and strategic decision-making at a multinational bank
Parallel Stream B: Applied Theory – Room: UEBS – Auditorium
Chair: Mairi Maclean
Thomas Davis
Two triangles: Putting Lefebvre’s ‘spatial triad’ to work in the Baltic Triangle, Liverpool
Garance Marechal and Stephen Linstead
Kitchen magic! Early media chefs’ reconfiguration of the field of cooking
Sonia Coman and Andrea Casey
The enduring presence of the founder in collection museums: A historical and interdisciplinary perspective
Session V: Friday, July 05, 14:00 to 15:30
– Parallel Stream –
Parallel Stream A: Politics and Parliaments – Room: UEBS – LT 1A
Chair: Diego Coraiola
Sabina Siebert
‘The Churchill effect’: Parliaments and their history
Sarah Robinson and Ron Kerr
‘Remember Mackintosh!’ Historical homology in the design of the Scottish parliament
Priscila Almeida and Eduardo Davel
Connecting cultural history to organizational studies: Contributions from the political festivity of Dois de Julho in Salvador (Bahia, Brazil)
Parallel Stream B: Memory – Room: UEBS – Auditorium
Chair: Gabrielle Durepos
Karan Sonpar, Federica Pazzaglia, Matthew Lyle and Ian J. Walsh
Memory work in response to breaches of trust: The Irish Banking Inquiry
Michel W. Lander
Tainting memories: The impact of stigmatization and institutional legacies on the founding of Scotch Whisky distilleries, 1680–1914
Rohny Saylors
Using microstoria to study (re)membering in the context of (dis)enchantment: Empirical insights from the history of Sears and Walmart
Session VI: Saturday, July 06, 09:00 to 10:30
– Parallel Stream –
Parallel Stream A: Processes and Boundaries – Room: UEBS – LT 1A
Chair: Anna Soulsby
Liv Egholm
Drawing the boundaries of the needy. Boundary objects and translation practices
Audrey-Anne Cyr
Deep rootedness: Institutionalization of reciprocity and trust in family firms
Vittoria Magrelli, Josip kotlar, Alfredo De Massis and emanuela rondi
Generations, evolution and rhythm in family firms: The role of mediators
Parallel Stream B: Entrepreneurship – Room: UEBS – Auditorium
Chair: Charles Harvey
Nicholas D. Wong and Tom Mcgovern
Entrepreneurial history and firm growth: A case study of Rushworths Music House
Trevor Israelsen, J. Robert Mitchell and Dominic Lim
Temporality and stakeholder enrollment: Memory, imagination, and rhetorical history in the context of entrepreneurship
Ken Sakai
Confluence of multiple histories in institutional change: A case study on the management of surgical needles in Japanese hospitals (1945–2000)
Session VII: Saturday, July 06, 11:00 to 12:30
Business and Public Sector Interface
 A: Business and Public Sector Interface – Room: UEBS – Auditorium
Chair: Stewart Clegg
Pilar Acosta and Julio Zuluaga
Rethinking the role of businesses in the provision of public goods: A historical perspective
Christiane Chihadeh
Critical grounded theory and an imagined history: Thatcherism and the privatisation of the British internal energy market, 1980–2010
Anna Soulsby
Studying the processes of managerial legitimacy and the control of former state-owned enterprises in post-communist societies: A longitudinal study
 B: Religion – Room: UEBS – LT 1A
Chair: Alistair Mutch
Lauri J. Laine and Ewald Kibler
Myth and organizational structure: The case of the Orthodox Christian Valaam monastery (~1200–2018)
Myleen Leary
Regulations, bricolage, and the development of the Jewish ghetto in 16th century Venice
Jose Bento da Silva and Paolo Quattrone
Inscribing ambiguity into procedural logics: Insights from the diffusion of the Jesuit Spiritual Exercises (1522–1992)