Bauhaus digital archive

For those of you interested in archives available online, the Bauhaus Archive has made its digital archive available here:

There are also a digital history resources available for those interested in the history of the school, which celebrated its centenary in 2019, though the original website has now be changed to and does not feature quite as much useful historical detail anymore – but hopefully this will come back as they develop the site!

Biz Hist Coll: 26 January 2021

How to Start an Early Modern Tax Haven: Smuggling, Fraud and Global Business in Eighteenth-century Britain

Date: 26/01/2021 @ 16:00 hrs London

Speaker:  David Chan Smith (Wilfrid Laurier University)
Follow David here: @davidchansmith
Moderator: Nicholas Wong (Nortumbria University, Newcastle)
Register here. Abstract below.


Tired of paying high customs duties recently introduced by the government? Looking for a competitive advantage in overseas markets or to access other imperial trading systems? This talk investigates the emergence of early modern tax havens around Britain. Tax havens are often assumed to be a modern phenomenon that responded to the establishment of corporate and income taxes. Yet traders in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries made creative and routine use of the jurisdictional peculiarities that existed within Europe. Local and national elites who saw these havens as sources of income sponsored these efforts even though they frequently involved fraud and smuggling. This talk will survey the functioning of the early modern tax avoidance system around Britain, explore the development of these havens and the response of central government. To illustrate its arguments, the paper examines a case study of the Isle of Man and its establishment in the 1720s as a tax avoidance hub in the Atlantic slave trade.

Organizational Memory Studies – Perspectives piece & EGOS track

Posted on behalf of Dr Hamid Foroughi:

Dear colleagues,

I hope you are keeping well in these unsettling times. 
I just thought our recent Organization Studies perspective piece- Organizational Memory Studies– might be of interest to you. In this article, Diego Coraiola, Jukka Rintamaki, Sebastian Mena, Bill Foster and I provide an overview of the developments in the filed in the last decade or so. See the link to the article below.

Bill Foster, Sebastian Mena and I are also organizing an EGOS sub-theme- to take this conversation further.
Sub-theme 49: Organizational Memory Studies: Toward an Inclusive Research Agenda
We would be of course delighted to see any contribution from yourself or your coauthors to our subtheme.
We appreciate if you also share this to other colleagues of yours who might be interested in this.

An extraordinary story for your Christmas break

As we are getting very close to a well-deserved winter break, I wanted to share an extraordinary story with you about how historical research uncovered the life and family history of one woman’s immortal cells. Henrietta Lacks was an African-American woman whose cells reproduced in laboratories when no others would. They have become the basis of many medical innovations, and have also played a role in medical research into the current pandemic.

However, until a few years ago, neither Lacks nor her descendants knew about her crucial role, as her cells were harvested without her consent. Despite her enormous significance for medical research, some members of her family struggled to get health insurance, as one interviewee pointed out. Her family learned about the both sad and significant medical history of their ancestor when a historian researching the history of Lacks’ cells contacted them. The BBC’s short video highlights the aftermath of the discovery of her amazing cells, her untimely death from cancer, her family’s discovery of her long legacy and their current engagement with medical research facilitated by their ancestor. It is an important story well worth watching over the holidays.

AOM MH community blog

AOM submission dates move ever closer (14 January 2021 5pm EST). In case you were not aware that the Management History track at AOM now runs a blog with news and updates, you should visit this website and subscribe!

The PDW call for submissions can be found here:

The call for the scholarly programme is here:

Survey for the FT50 list

Dear colleagues

As you may be aware, the FT50 list of journals is currently requesting feedback from the community about which journals to include in the new iteration of the list. There is currently no history journal on the list, and as a survey of published articles, which we did a few years ago, highlighted, about 65% of our authors are in Schools of Business, Management, or Accounting, Finance and Economics (Decker et al., 2018), making Business History the key journal for historical contributions to management and business research. Since 2013 our two-year impact factor has increased from 0.56 to over 1, and CiteScore to over 2. This is at the top end of history and business history journal impact factors, and comparable to elite journals in the discipline such as Past & Present (IF 0.831) or Economic History Review (IF 1.1). Submissions to Business History have steadily increased over the last few years and we now receive about 200 manuscripts per year. Our downloads were 64,538 in 2017, 79.371 in 2018, over 122,000 in 2019 and over 82,000 by July 2020. We believe this illustrates the progress we have made in the last few years, with your support, in what is a field with many dedicated journals, on which we hope to build in the future. If you would like to support this, please you spare a minute and fill out this survey (  for the FT50 list of journals and suggest Business History as a journal to include.

Thank you for your continued support of the journal and wider business history community.

Happy holidays and all the best for the new year!

Neil Rollings & Stephanie Decker
Editors-in-Chief of Business History

Decker, S., Stokes, R., Colli, A., de Jong, A., Fernandez Perez, P., & Rollings, N. (2018). Change of referencing style. Business History, 60(1), 1–3.

EGOS tracks relevant to history

And as the end of the year nears, so do the January deadlines for AOM and EGOS. EGOS 2021 offers bountiful opportunities for submitting history-based and history-inspired pieces of organizational scholarship this year. Below a quick summary of the main tracks that are likely interested in historical perspectives:

Sub-theme 01: [SWG] Organization & Time: The Situated Activity of Time Enactment

Tor Hernes Copenhagen Business School,
Joanna Karmowska Oxford Brookes University, United
Claus Rerup Frankfurt School of Finance and Management,

Call for Papers

The third sub-theme of Standing Working Group (SWG) 01 will concern the more situated, on-going activity of time enactment in organizations. The on-going time enactment is crucial for understanding a host of issues, including the very agency of the moment, the roles of temporal structures, and the on-going interplay between evoked pasts and projected futures. It will lend focus to temporal structure, including routines, practices and materiality, through which time is enacted in organizations. It will connect the situated time enactment to different variations and combinations of near and distant pasts and futures, while considering factors such as agency, emotions and aesthetics. The empirical focus invites, but not exclusively, papers on topics such as digitalisation, creative organizations and start-ups.

Sub-theme 24: Craft in Modern Society

Jochem Kroezen University of Cambridge, United
Innan Sasaki University of Warwick, United
Pursey P.M.A.R. Heugens Erasmus University, The

Call for Papers

The last two decades have witnessed an extraordinary resurgence of interest in craft and craftsmanship. Once thought to be an obsolete mode of organizing and producing for modern society, now craft movements appear to be reconfiguring entire sectors, with examples ranging from beer brewing (Kroezen & Heugens, 2019), to watchmaking (Raffaelli, 2019), to barbering (Ocejo, 2017) and to maker spaces (Browder et al., 2019). In addition to the transformative powers of craft production, there is also a surprisingly broad range of instances where heritage crafts have managed to survive despite pressures of modernization and globalization, such as the case in musical instrument making (Cattani et al., 2017) or Japanese family firms (Sasaki et al., 2019). Increasingly, management and organization scholars are paying attention to these phenomena across various strands of research and are contributing to a growing understanding of (1) what defines craft as opposed to established theories of organizing and (2) how empirically craft may be valued and organized differently across time and space. This sub-theme intends to offer a setting for scholars interested in craft and craftsmanship to advance our collective understanding of the concept and related phenomena and firmly establish craft as an object of investigation and theorization in its own right.

Sub-theme 33: Historical Organization Studies in Action: Strategy, Entrepreneurship, and Social Innovation

Mairi Maclean University of Bath, United
Roy Suddaby University of Victoria,
Stewart Clegg University of Technology, Sydney,

Call for Papers

Historical organization studies is ‘organizational research that draws on historical sources, methods and knowledge to explore, refine and develop theoretical ideas and conceptual insights’ (Maclean et al., 2016). Put simply, it seeks to blend history and organization studies. Its status is that of emergent academic movement rather than established community of practice. For over two decades, organization theorists have emphasized the need for more and better research recognizing the importance of the past in shaping the present and future (Clegg, 2006; Kieser, 1994). Some have identified a distinct historic turn in organization studies led by scholars who perceive the field to have been constrained by its orientation towards contemporary cross-sectional studies covering limited periods of time (Clark & Rowlinson, 2004; Mills et al., 2016). By historicising organizational research, it is argued, the contexts and forces bearing upon organizations might be more fully recognized and analyses of organizational dynamics might be improved. But how, precisely, might a traditionally empirically-oriented discipline, such as history, be incorporated into a theoretically-oriented discipline such as organization studies? In recent years this has been the topic of extensive debate, giving rise to a number of ground-breaking publications (Bucheli & Wadhwani, 2014; Kipping & Üsdiken, 2014; Rowlinson et al., 2014; Suddaby et al., 2010) and a flurry of Special Issues in journals including, inter alia. Academy of Management ReviewOrganization StudiesManagement Learning, and Organization.

Sub-theme 49: Organizational Memory Studies: Toward an Inclusive Research Agenda

Hamid Foroughi University of Portsmouth, United Kingdom
Sébastien Mena City, University of London, United Kingdom
William M. Foster University of Alberta, Canada

Call for Papers

Collective memories are powerful factors in shaping both individual perceptions and social behaviour, and as such, are important for organizing processes. Organizations are also arenas for the engagement of various social actors in collective processes of remembering and forgetting. While organizational research has tended to adopt a psychological metaphor of storage and retrieval of knowledge to understand organizational memory (e.g., Walsh & Ungson, 1991; Ren & Argote, 2011), recent advances have also engaged with sociological perspectives on memory (e.g., Hatch & Schultz, 2017; Foroughi, 2019; Mena et al., 2016; Ravasi et al., 2019). For instance, the interest in the social construction of organizational mnemonics (Coraiola et al., 2015) has fuelled the development of theoretical approaches on the practices of remembering and the uses of the past in achieving organizational strategies (e.g., Foster, et al., 2017; Wadhwani et al., 2018). Others have also looked at the importance of organizations for broader processes of social remembering and forgetting, such as the perpetuation of inequalities or the collective forgetting of corporate irresponsibility (e.g., Cutcher et al., 2019; Mena, et al., 2016). Yet, others have highlighted the role of diverse stakeholders, such as employees, customers and investors/donors, in shaping an organizational memory (Bell & Taylor, 2016; Foroughi & Al-Amoudi, 2019). Altogether, these examinations of memory in and around organizations from various perspectives have been called ‘Organizational Memory Studies’ (OMS) (Rowlinson et al., 2010).

Sub-theme 59: Organizing in the Age of Nationalism

Alexei Koveshnikov Aalto University, Finland
Sally Riad Victoria Universiy of Wellington, New Zealand
Eero Vaara University of Oxford, United Kingdom

Call for Papers

Nationalism is a fundamentally important dynamic force in contemporary society (Billig, 1995; Gellner & Breuilly, 1983; Wodak, 2017). There are different interpretations of what nationalism is and a multitude of approaches to study it (Delanty & Kumar, 2006). Among these, Benedict Anderson’s (1983) idea of nations as “imagined communities” is based on the assumption that people in societies can imagine their unity and develop a sense of belonging by way of myths, symbols, and stories that help them to identify with and as a community that is (seen as) the nation. It applies well to studying contemporary nationalism in its multiple forms, and it has proved to be useful for moving discussions from objectivist to subjectivist conceptions of national unity (Segal & Handler, 2006). It is especially relevant today as we enter an era of “post-truth” politics and “alternative facts” (Knight & Tsoukas, 2019) where nationalism and constructions of nationalism become increasingly prominent parts of language games played by powerful societal actors such as politicians and corporate executives for the purposes of political mobilization and legitimation.

Recording of Peter Buckley’s distinguished lecture on “The Structural Reshaping of Globalization”

I am pleased to share the recording of the distinguished lecture with Peter Buckley, Professor of International Business at Leeds University Business School, who talked on The Structural Reshaping of Globalization. Alain Verbeke, Professor of International Business Strategy at the Haskayne School of Business, University of Calgary served as a discussant. The lecture took place November 20, 2020; you can find the recording here:

This talk examines the role of theory, specifically internalization theory, in examining the structural reshaping of globalization. Four empirical changes in the global economy are identified.

  1. The fracture in the global economy between the USA and China, including “the splinternet”. 
  2. “Systemic Competition” and its consequences. 
  3. Rising VUCA (Volatility, Uncertainty, Complexity and Ambiguity) and corporate responses. 
  4. Innovation. The theoretical response is presented by nested theories of internalization, relying on common principles and concepts.

For more information about Professor Peter Buckley, you can refer to

For more information about Professor Alain Verbeke, you can refer to

PhD studentship opportunity: Women & Work in the City of London, 1870-1970

The University of Oxford, in partnership with the Baring Archive, are offering a 3-4 year PhD studentship on the topic of Women and Work in the City of London, 1870-1970. The studentship will begin in autumn (Michaelmas term) 2021, and the main data source is the Baring Archive Ltd. More information on this exciting opportunity can be found here:

The deadline for applying is 8th January 2021.

Paper presentation on Building Identity at the Bauhaus

I’ll be presenting a paper jointly authored with Elena Giovanonni (Royal Holloway) and Emmanuella Plakoyiannaki (Vienna) at Henley Business School on Wednesday 2nd December at 13.00 (UK time). If you’d like to join, please email me (stephanie.decker[at] and I pass on the Teams link.

Title:                     Building Identity: Architextual Resources in the Identity Formation of the Bauhaus

Presenter(s):     Stephanie Decker, University of Bristol


The Bauhaus School of Design (1919-1933) provides us with a micro-historical case study of identity formation, an area that has not been widely explored. We analyse the engagement between organizational identity and architecture as they both take form. We highlight the importance of architecture as an identity resource for the new school, and develop a framework that highlights four distinct ways in which spatial and material resources can support (or obstruct) identity formation: instrumental, by providing a space for organising; aesthetic, by visually pleasing organisational members; symbolic, by offering meaningful representation of organisational ideas; and finally temporal, by being enduring over time. We refer to the combination of these four potential elements as architextual, as they create a frame of narratives and discourses across material resources, people, practices and ideas that are inherent in the ideation, construction and interpretation of material artefacts. In our case narrative we show how these architextual identity resources not only helped the Bauhaus to overcome threats to its existence as a new organisation, but also in turn spurred on the creation of further architextual identity resources, not only helping to form and refine the school’s identity, but also facilitating multiple and shifting organizational identities over time. Finally, we show that architextual identity resources exist alongside other more commonly used resources such as discursive invocations of identity, but highlight that in particular the symbolic and temporal nature of architextual identity resources means that they remained pivotal and facilitated the emergence of a strong legacy when the Bauhaus was disbanded as an organisation after 14 years, while its influence as one of the leading design movements of the twentieth century endured.