Virtual Symposium on the Temporality of Entrepreneurial Opportunities

17 07 2020

I wanted to reach out to let you know about a virtual symposium on the temporality of entrepreneurial opportunities that some colleagues and I will be hosting on July 24 in advance of the AoM conference.

We think that entrepreneurial opportunities-as situations (e.g., Shane & Venkataraman, 2000), social constructs (e.g., Alvarez & Barney, 2007) and/or objects of entrepreneurial discourse (e.g., Cornelissen and Clarke, 2010)-have something to do with a contrast between the status quo (i.e. the past) and the imagined future which may be realized through action in the present. But we’ve noticed that the entrepreneurship literature rarely deals explicitly or directly with the relationship between entrepreneurial opportunities and the passage of time (e.g., historical time, process time, clock time, etc.).

Join us on July 24, 2020 at 8 AM Pacific Time for a panel discussion and dialogue on the question-how does an explicit focus on time, temporality or history shape the way you conceptualize and study entrepreneurial opportunity?

Panelists include Dimo Dimov, David Kirsch, Jacqueline Kirtley, Tanja Leppäaho, Rob Mitchell, Dan Raff, Andrew Smith, Dan Wadhwani and Matt Wood.

Here the link to participate in the session. The meeting ID is 986 4484 7268. The password for the meeting will be ENT&Time. Upon joining the meeting, you will be prompted to provide your consent to participating in a recorded meeting. We will be posting a video recording of this meeting for further discussion and engagement as an asynchronous event of the Academy of Management annual meeting co-hosted by the entrepreneurship and management history divisions.

OHN returns & CfP “Entrepreneurship and Transformations”

15 07 2020

Organizational History Network

Hello everyone and apologies for the long pause between posts, which was partly due to illness, but also, as you can imagine, due to the extraordinary times we find ourselves in. Many of us had to prepare online teaching at short notice, and many of the events we blog about have been cancelled due to the ongoing pandemic. Going forward, we will only run one blog per week on Fridays, as there simply not as many events and updates as there would usually be.

But today we have some good news, as one of our great editors, Christina Lubinski, is looking for submissions for an exciting new special issue in Business History on historical entrepreneurship.

Stay safe & healthy


Business History Special Issue

Entrepreneurship and Transformations

Special Issue Editor(s)

View original post 1,008 more words

CFP: Family Business Review (FBR) Special Issue on History-informed Family Business Research

10 07 2020

Call for Papers for the 2023

Family Business Review (FBR) Special Issue on History-informed Family Business Research




Guest Editors

Roy Suddaby, University of Victoria (

Brian S. Silverman, University of Toronto (

Alfredo De Massis, Free University of Bozen-Bolzano and Lancaster University (

Peter Jaskiewicz, University of Ottawa (

Evelyn R. Micelotta, University of Ottawa (



Special Issue Theme

History is pervasive in family business settings, where values, beliefs, narratives, and artefacts of the founding family are handed down from generation to generation (Colli, 2003). The history of a family and its business therefore pervades family business goals, practices, and outcomes, creating a close link between the history of family businesses, their present traditions, and future aspirations (De Massis et al., 2016; Jaskiewicz et al., 2015; Zellweger et al., 2012).


Because of the prominence of history in family businesses, these firms have often been stigmatized as a form of business organization that is steadfast to its history and traditions, path dependent, conservative, resistant to changes and unable to adapt to dynamic and constantly evolving markets (Chandler, 1977; Morck & Yeung, 2003; Poza et al., 1997). Yet, family businesses remain dominant in any economy (La Porta et al., 1999), many of them are highly innovative (De Massis et al., 2018), resilient to crises, and equipped with the stamina to pursue entrepreneurial projects over generations (Jaskiewicz et al., 2016; Sinha, Jaskiewicz, Gibb, & Combs, 2020). The latter is consistent with emerging research suggesting that the history and traditions of families and their businesses do not have to be a rigid burden but, in some cases, can be a holy grail for enduring innovation and change (Erdogan et al., 2020; Jaskiewicz, Combs, & Ketchen, 2016; Suddaby & Jaskiewicz, 2020).


While researchers thus recognize the paradoxical nature of the family business as an organization that can be burdened or empowered by history, theory on how history actually ties into family business’ tradition, change, and aspiration remains scarce (De Massis, Frattini, Kotlar, Messeni Petruzzelli, & Wright, 2016; Erdogan et al., 2020; Sinha et al., 2020; Suddaby, Coraiola, Harvey, & Foster, 2020; Suddaby & Jaskiewicz, 2020). One reason for this unsatisfactory status quo is the weak connection between history and family business scholarship that has limited current understanding of what family business scholars can learn from the wealth of history and historical research, and how they can integrate related learnings in the study of family business (e.g., Colli, 2003; Colli & Fernandez Perez, 2020).


Considering the rapidly growing interest in studying the link between history and family businesses, we believe that it is warranted and timely to build a strong foundation for a history-informed approach to the study of family businesses, by which we refer to family business research that draws on historical research methods and/or leverages history as a key component (or variable) of theory or empirical analysis (Argyres et al., 2020; Sasaki et al., 2020; Sinha et al., 2020; Suddaby & Foster, 2017; Suddaby et al., 2020).


This Special Issue therefore calls for new, interdisciplinary research on family firms that extends our understanding of how and why history and historical research methods can enrich theoretical explanations of family business behavior and of temporal phenomena happening in family business settings. We call for both “history in theory” and “history to theory” studies. We call for original studies that propose novel and more fine-grained theoretical understanding of the role and use of history in family business processes as well as a reconceptualization of history and the use of history in family business research. At the same time, we encourage scholars to develop and apply historical research methods that allow them to use historical data and records to build and test their theoretical models about family business behaviors and outcomes. By doing so, this Special Issue favors the development and application of new perspectives and innovative methodological approaches for addressing critical questions in family business that favor a better integration of the academic fields of history and family business.


Manuscripts may address, but are not limited to, the following topics:

  • How can family business phenomena be better theorized when the historical context where they take place, and the complex temporal dimensions through which they occur, are explicitly taken into account?
  • How do family businesses and their actors use history to give meaning to the present, inform their expectations about the future, and make business and family decisions?
  • What is the role of rhetorical history in shaping family business behavior, its determinants and outcomes? (Suddaby, Foster, & Trank, 2010). What is the relationship between narrative, story-telling, and history in the strategy processes of a family business?
  • How can traditions be (re-)conceptualized in family business settings to better account for their ambivalent roles for family business’ goals, behavior, and outcomes?
  • How can history-informed research be used to manage the tradition and innovation paradox or other typical paradoxes characterizing family business behavior?
  • How can family firms leverage their history, and/or resources pertaining to different points in their past, to make their way toward the future through acts directed to innovation (e.g., “innovation through traditions”) and/or entrepreneurship (e.g., “entrepreneurial legacy”), or other vital organizational processes?
  • How can change and innovation be used in a family business setting to perpetuate history and traditions (e.g., “tradition through innovation”)?
  • What are the distinctive organizational routines and capabilities that enable family firms to combine and reconfigure their history over time and build a bundle of valuable historical resources?
  • What are the distinctive organizational routines and capabilities that enable family firms to adopt retrospective and prospective approaches to using their resources to concurrently perpetuate tradition and achieve innovation (e.g., “temporal symbiosis”)?
  • How do the past and the historical context inform how family-centered and business-centered goals are set in the family business context?
  • How do the past and the historical context inform how new business opportunities are identified, evaluated and exploited? What’s the role played by history for transgenerational entrepreneurship in the family enterprise?
  • How can the assumptions behind transgenerational or path dependence-based predictions about family business behavior (e.g., decline in entrepreneurial attitude across generations) be understood when the historical context is considered?
  • How did specific and non-recurrent events or actions in the history of the family and/or its business lead to particular firm behaviors, and to the development of organizational capabilities (or lack thereof)?
  • What are the advantages of employing a historically embedded approach to improve current understanding of how family businesses learn, innovate, and make strategic decisions over time? How can such approaches be adapted and extended by family business scholars?
  • How do family business phenomena and practices evolve over time, and how are they shaped by the interactions between family firms, families, and their histories?
  • What are the unpredictable, nonrecurrent events either in the family or in the business system that change the course of history and the evolution of a family business organization?
  • How do different actors, groups, or family business organizations perceive time when it is conceived as a complex, socially constructed concept?
  • How do individuals and groups within family businesses conceive time in practice, and allocate their attention differently to the past, present, and future?
  • How do different temporal foci and/or orientations of different actors within the family business, and /or their perception of the past, influence the behavior and performance of the family firm? How do such orientations change in the presence of specific situational factors, such as intra-family succession or business exit?
  • How can an “historical cognizance” perspective (Kipping & Üsdiken, 2014) that incorporates period effects and historical contingencies into the theorizing process be useful to predict family firm behavior and its effect on family and business outcomes?
  • How can historical research methods and historical data be useful to family business research for understanding the context of contemporary phenomena, identifying sources of exogenous variations, developing and testing informed causal inferences and theories, and supporting analyses of temporal phenomena occurring across generations?


Submission Process

Manuscripts must be submitted through the Family Business Review web site indicating “Special Issue History” as the manuscript type. The special issue guest editors will review the received manuscripts for publication consideration in this special issue of FBR. Editors reserve the right to desk reject complete papers if they are deemed underdeveloped for this issue.


Timeline for 2022 Special Issue on History

May 28/29, 2021       Paper Development Workshop at FERC Conference

July 1, 2021               Manuscripts due. Please submit manuscripts via the FBR online submission portal at (please be sure to select “Special Issue History” as the submission type).

Sept. 1, 2021              1st round feedback on reviews provided to authors

Feb 1, 2022                Invited revisions due

April 1, 2022              2nd round feedback on reviews provided to authors

Sept 1, 2022               2nd round invited revisions due

Nov 1, 2022               3rd round feedback on reviews provided to authors

Jan 1, 2023                 All papers & editor’s introduction finalized; contents transferred to Sage

March 2023               FBR Special Issue “History-informed Family Business Research” published





Paper Development Workshop

We encourage authors to attend the Paper Development Workshop (PDW) for this Special Issue before submitting their manuscripts. The PDW will be offered during the Family Enterprise Research Conference (FERC) at the University of Florida Atlantic University, Delray Beach, Florida on May 28-29, 2021. More information about FERC in 2021 can be found here: We will add more detailed information on the PDW to the webpage at the beginning of 2021.


About FBR

Launched in 1988, Family Business Review is an interdisciplinary scholarly forum publishing conceptual, theoretical, and empirical research that aims to advance the understanding of family business around the world. FBR has a 2-year impact factor of 6.188, ranking it 13th out of 147 journals in the category business.



We look forward to receiving your manuscripts and working hard with you to make this issue a success for our field. For questions, please contact any member of the Special Issue co-editors.



Argyres, N. S., De Massis A., Foss N. J., Frattini F., Jones G., Silverman B.S. (2020). History-informed strategy research: The promise of history and historical research methods in advancing strategy scholarship. Strategic Management Journal, 41(3), 343-368.

Chandler, A. D. (1977). The visible hand: The managerial revolution in American business. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.

Colli, A. (2003). The history of family business, 1850-2000 (Vol. 47). Cambridge University Press.

Colli, A., & Perez, P. F. (2020). Historical methods in family business studies. In Handbook of qualitative research methods for family business. Edward Elgar Publishing.

De Massis, A., Audretsch, D., Uhlaner, L., Kammerlander, N. (2018). Innovation with limited resources: Management lessons from the German Mittelstand. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 35(1), 125-146.

De Massis, A., Frattini, F., Kotlar, J., Messeni-Petruzzelli, A., Wright M. (2016). Innovation through tradition: Lessons from innovative family businesses and directions for future research. Academy of Management Perspectives, 30(1), 93-116.

Erdogan I., Rondi E., De Massis A. (2020). Managing the tradition and innovation paradox in family firms: A family imprinting perspective. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 44(1), 20-54.

Jaskiewicz, P., Combs, J. G., Ketchen Jr, D. J., & Ireland, R. D. (2016). Enduring entrepreneurship: antecedents, triggering mechanisms, and outcomes. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 10(4), 337-345.

Jaskiewicz, P., Combs, J. G., & Rau, S. B. (2015). Entrepreneurial legacy: Toward a theory of how some family firms nurture transgenerational entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 30(1), 29-49.

Kipping, M., & Üsdiken, B. (2014). History in organization and management theory: More than meets the eye. The Academy of Management Annals, 8(1), 535-588.

La Porta, R., Lopez‐de‐Silanes, F., & Shleifer, A. (1999). Corporate ownership around the world. The journal of finance, 54(2), 471-517.

Morck, R., & Yeung, B. (2003). Agency problems in large family business groups. Entrepreneurship theory and practice, 27(4), 367-382.

Poza, E. J., Alfred, T., & Maheshwari, A. (1997). Stakeholder perceptions of culture and management practices in family and family firms ‐ A preliminary report. Family Business Review, 10(2), 135-155.

Sasaki, I., Kotlar, J. Ravasi, D., & Vaara, E. (2020). Dealing with revered past: Historical identity statements and strategic change in Japanese family firms. Strategic Management Journal, 41(3), 590-623.

Sinha, P. N., Jaskiewicz, P., Gibb, J., & Combs, J. G. (2020). Managing history: How New Zealand’s Gallagher Group used rhetorical narratives to reprioritize and modify imprinted strategic guideposts. Strategic Management Journal, 41(3), 557-589.

Suddaby, R., Coraiola, D., Harvey, C., & Foster, W. (2020). History and the micro‐foundations of dynamic capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 41(3), 530-556.

Suddaby, R., & Foster, W. M. (2017). History and organizational change. Journal of Management, 43(1), 19-38.

Suddaby, R., Foster, W. M., & Trank, C. Q. (2010). Rhetorical history as a source of competitive advantage. Advances in Strategic Management, 27, 147-173.

Suddaby, R. & Jaskiewicz, P. (2020). Managing traditions: A critical capability for family business success. Family Business Review, forthcoming.

Zellweger, T. M., Kellermanns, F. W., Chrisman, J. J., & Chua, J. H. (2012). Family control and family firm valuation by family CEOs: The importance of intentions for transgenerational control. Organization Science, 23(3), 851-868.



Cass is No Longer

7 07 2020
Cass Business School, which is located in London’s financial district, has decided to rename itself as it has some to light that Sir John Cass was a slave trader. (The business school acquired its current name in 2001 after it received a substantial donation from the Sir John Cass Foundation, which was originally established to educate the children of London’s poor). The Cass Foundation is now investigating whether it is allowed to remove the name of its founding donor.           
The timing of this move is a happy coincidence, as it allows that business school to name itself after a new donor at a point when money is tight. Let’s hope they do their due diligence this time round. Personally, I think it would be great if they named the business school after a donor who is an immigrant entrepreneur, which is what Manchester Business School did when it acquired the name Alliance Manchester Business School after a donation from Lord Alliance.

My Online Participation at EGOS 2020

30 06 2020


The 2020 EGOS (European Group for Organization Studies) conference is being held virtually this year because of the virus.  I’ve got a co-authored paper in Sub-theme 12 (Institutions, Innovation, Impact: Temporal, Spatial and Material Foundations of Institutional Innovation and Change) and will also, childcare permitting, be logging to listen to papers in the sub-theme that I regard as my natural home at EGOS (sub-theme 1, Organization & Time: Understanding the Past (and Future) in the Present). I have read a number of the sub-theme 1 papers and hope to be offer comments via Zoom.

I must say that I am pleased that participation in this online conference costs just 10 Euro, which is vastly cheaper than registration fee for the online Academy of Management conferencethat will be taking place in early August, which is US$200.

What explains the considerable difference in the registration fee for these two online conferences?  I’m genuinely interested to know the answer to this question. I think that part of the answer is that the AoM is based in the US and many things in the US, particularly those that relate to higher education and healthcare but also public sector infrastructure projects, cost much more than other advanced economies.  For reasons that have never been adequately explained, it costs far more to build a mile of subway in the US than it does in western Europe or East Asia. Getting an appendix or buying a shot of insulin also costs way more in the US that in natural comparison economies. The latter is why Americans go to Canadian pharmacies. In my view, these greater costs are symptomatic of deep-seated problems in the US to which neither the American right nor the American left have workable solutions. The vast gap between the EGOS and AoM registration fees is consistent with a broader pattern. Clearly, the AoM’s leaders may wish to contain future cost escalation, perhaps by becoming more like EGOS.

Here are the details of the sub-theme 12 session at which my paper will be presented (2 July, 17:30-18:30 CET).

Chair: Nina Granqvist, Aalto University

Data science to study data science: Inter-field cultural dynamics at the early moments of an emergent field Rodrigo Valadao, University of Alberta
Location, location, location: How space and institutions mediate category dynamics in the British and Japanese regenerative medicine field Maki Umemura, Cardiff Business School,  Andrew Smith University of Liverpool Management School

Organizing temporary events and temporality: the cases of comic- cons and art biennial Yesim Tonga Uriarte (IMT Lucca) Jörg Sydow (Free University of Berlin) Maria Luisa Catoni(IMT Lucca)

Sub-theme 12 will have parallel sessions this year. Here are the sessions I have chosen to attend.

Panel Selections EGOS 2020

Coleman Prize Winner Announced

29 06 2020

The Coleman Prize is named in honour of the British Business Historian Donald Coleman, this prize is awarded annually by the Association of Business Historians to recognise excellence in new research in Britain. It is open to PhD dissertations in Business History either having a British subject or completed at a British University. All dissertations completed in the previous two calendar years to that of their submission are eligible (with the exception of previous submissions). It is a condition of eligibility for the Prize that shortlisted finalists will present their findings at the Association’s annual conference.

This year’s prize was awarded to Akram Beniamin for his dissertation “Cotton, Finance and Business Networks in a Globalised World: The Case of Egypt during the first half of the Twentieth century”.



My thesis investigated commodity networks, foreign banking and foreign business networks, as three manifestations of the first global economy, in Egypt. The country was well integrated into the world economy by exporting cotton, importing foreign capital, and hosting a large foreign community. The study shows that the Egyptian cotton network was sophisticated as market participants were spatially dispersed. The network was instrumentally coordinated by foreign banks that provided the crucial function of intermediating the flows of cotton, finance, and information. The thesis demonstrates that the history of foreign banks in Egypt does not conform to the imperialism and exploitation rhetoric. Foreign banks were businesses that sought profits and faced many risks and challenges. Some risks were uncontrollable and negatively affected bank performance, which was shaped by trade-off between opportunity and risk appetite. The analysis of the interlocking directorates of the Egyptian corporate and elite networks establishes that these networks, predominantly controlled by local foreigners, served as a basis for coordinating and maintaining collective interests. The structure of the elite network presumably fostered entrepreneurial activities that were funded by foreign capital. The analysis documents the gradual rise of indigenous entrepreneurs at the expense of foreigners.

About the winner:


Akram Beniamin is a Teaching Fellow in International Business & Strategy at Henley Business School. He holds a PhD from Henley Business School (2020), an MSc in Development Finance from the University of Reading (2012), and a BA in Management from Sadat Academy for Management Sciences, Egypt (2002).

Akram’s broad research interests focus on business history, entrepreneurship and international business in developing countries. His doctoral thesis investigated commodity networks, foreign banking and business networks, as three manifestations of the first global economy of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, in Egypt. His research has been presented in many international conferences, such as the Business History Conference, Association of Business Historians, and Reading-UNCTAD International Business Conference

Akram is a tutorial leader on two modules: Business Statistics (MM1F13) and Markets, Marketing and Strategy (MM1F12). He also was a tutorial leader on a number of financial and managerial accounting modules delivered by Business Informatics, Systems and Accounting at Henley Business School.

Akram is a CFA charter holder and before pursuing an academic career, he spent ten years in the banking industry in Egypt where he worked for multinational and state-owned banks spanning Corporate Banking and Credit Risk for both large corporates and SMEs.


CFP: Special Issue on ‘International Sources for Advertising and Marketing History’

26 06 2020


The Journal of Historical Research in Marketing invites submissions for a special issue focused on ‘International Sources for Advertising and Marketing History’. Anyone embarking upon advertising and marketing history research in addition to a literature search will seek out primary sources. However, locating such primary sources can be challenging. Many government archives, such as Library and Archives Canada, contain a wealth of material relating to advertising and marketing history which is underutilised because researchers are mostly unaware of the collections.  Similarly the digitisation of historic newspapers around the world is making available an ever increasing wealth of advertising and marketing content which is underutilised by historians.  Other online digitised primary sources such as those available through family history websites can be utilised by historians.

For this special issue of JHRMspecific topics might include:

  • Specialist advertising and marketing history archives,
  • Corporate archives,
  • Business archives,
  • Government archives,
  • University archives,
  • Large digitised collections such as one at the Smithsonian:,
  • Digitised historic newspapers,
  • Transnational web portals such as,
  • Family history websites.

Submissions for this special issue will be open from 1 August 2021 until 30 September 2021 with an expected publication as part of the 2022 volume of the journal.  If you are unsure of the suitability of your topic or have questions regarding a submission, please contact the special issue guest editors Richard Hawkins, and Leighann Neilson,

How to submit to the Journal of Historical Research in Marketing

Submissions for this special issue of JHRM should be made using ScholarOne Manuscripts, the online submission and peer review system. Registration and access is available on the journal’s ScholarOne site Please select this special issue from the drop down menu as part of the submission process. Full information and guidance on using ScholarOne Manuscripts is available at the Emerald ScholarOne Manuscripts Support Centre:

Immigration and Freedom

24 06 2020






It is well understood that restrictive immigration policies constrain the freedom of migrants who want to move from poorer countries to richer ones. Alex Tabarrok has recently been an eloquent advocate of open immigrationand critic of the worldwide move to immigration restrictions.  The Singapore-based academic Chandran Kukathas argues that such anti-immigrant policies also constitute unacceptable restrictions on the freedom of people already living in wealthy countries. He makes this argument in a forthcoming Princeton University Press book and in an IEA academic webinar that took place today


Concerns about immigration usually stem from a fear that immigration threatens to undermine the institutions and values of a liberal democratic society. Less often considered is the impact of immigration control on those same values and institutions. This presentation looks at the other side of the ledger. It also considers the implications of episodes like pandemics to this issue. 

See more details here.


Important New Historical Paper on Entrepreneurship

3 06 2020

I’m promoting a new paper by Zoi Pittaki that applies Baumol (1990s) distinction between types of entrepreneurship (productive, unproductive, destructive) to recent Greek history. The paper has appeared in the journal Business History.
Extending William Baumol’s theory on entrepreneurship and institutions: lessons from post-Second World War Greece


This article examines William Baumol’s theory about the interaction between taxation and entrepreneurship and proposes an extension to it. The analysis shows that the traditional form of Baumol’s model, focusing mainly on the level of taxes, cannot be used in order to explain what happened in the Greek case. Utilising historical evidence from the mid 1950s to the late 1980s, this article confirms that problematic tax rules create difficulties for entrepreneurship and can lead to unproductive forms of it, as Baumol suggests. However, the focus here is on aspects of the system of taxation that Baumol’s model, examining solely tax rates and levels of taxation, neglected. It is shown that, as far as Greek entrepreneurship is concerned, the adverse effects of the system of taxation came not from the level of taxes, but mostly from a series of issues that increased its perceived unfairness and illegitimacy. Some of such issues were the complexity and frequent change of legislation, the insufficient organisation of the tax bureaus as well as the lack of adequate training and arbitrariness of the members of tax services. The evidence presented here suggests that Baumol’s model can be enriched by taking into consideration these aspects of taxation too.


I really like how the author used her historical research to address a gap in Baumol’s model. In my view, the paper makes a theoretical contribution that should be useful to both entrepreneurship researchers and to citizens interested in designing institutions that promote the right type of entrepreneurship.

Postdoc Job Opportunity in Oslo

31 05 2020

A Post-Doctoral Research Fellowship (SKO 1352) is available at the Department of Archaeology, Conservation and History (IAKH), University of Oslo. The positions are associated with the 5-year Consolidator Grant 818523 “CREATIVE IPR – The History of Intellectual Property Rights in the Creative Industries” funded by the European Research Council and led by Principal Investigator Véronique Pouillard, professor in history at the University of Oslo.

“Creative IPR” aims to study the history of the intellectual property rights in the creative industries, from the Paris Convention (1883) and the Berne Convention (1886) to the present day, with a particular focus on Europe in the global world. It examines the history of intellectual property rights in the creative industries, with a focus on national and international institutions, and on the management of creativity.

The applicant is asked to propose a project proposal that deals with one of the topics listed below:

(1) The history of the international harmonization of intellectual property rights. The topic will be situated within the history of the Bureaux Internationaux Réunis pour la Protection de la Propriété Intellectuelle in 1893 (BIRPI), until their replacement by World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) in 1970.


(2) The history of WIPO since 1970, with a focus on its defining moments for the history of the creative industries.

The applicants shall indicate the topic chosen in the application.

The main purpose of postdoctoral research fellowships is to qualify researchers for work in higher academic positions within their disciplines. The successful candidate is expected to become part of the research milieu or network and contribute to its development.

The position is available for a period of 3 years. There is a 10 % component of the position which is devoted to teaching and administrative duties.

The expected start date is 1 January 2021.

Starting salary is the equivalent of £43,000 pounds.