PDW on Historical methods at AOM2017

Last Friday we ran our professional development workshop on the uses of historical methods at the Academy of Management. We had a full house, seven excellent presentations and lively discussions with the audience. We also distributed our draft bibliography on historical methods in a previous post and hope you can give us some feedback and suggestions.

Dan, Diego and I plan to run future events focused on historical methodology in management and organization studies and are open to your feedback, suggestions and requests. Below you find links to our presentations from the day.

Introduction: AOM2017_PDW Hist Meth intro

JoAnne Yates: JY history and organizational studies AOM 2017

Michael Rowlinson: AOM pdw Historical Methods

Steph Decker: AOM2017_PDW-Archival Ethnography

Bill Foster: 2017 AOM Ethnostatistics PDW presentation

Christina Lubinski: AOM Distant Markets Christina

Michael Prietula: AoM-2017-PDW-prietula-2

 

All Academy Event on economic nationalism

On Sunday the Management History division at the Academy of Management hosted an all academy symposium on historical perspectives on business and management in an age of rising nationalism.

The panel comprised of Dan Wadhwani as the host and moderator, Matthias Kipping (York University), Takafumi Kurosawa (Kyoto University) and myself, Stephanie Decker (Aston University).

We argued that history can provide management scholars with a unique lens for understanding the current rise of nationalism, and the choices that businesses, managers, and entrepreneurs face in response to those changes. In part, this is because both supporters and critics of the current wave of nationalism point to historical examples and their consequences in justifying their positions. But, even more so, historical waves of globalization and de-globalization allow us a mirror for reflecting on the options and consequences that both policymakers and managers face today.

For instance, on the eve of World War I, much of the world economy was economically integrated, with the relatively free mobility of firms, people, and capital across borders. This earlier wave of global integration fell apart with the rise of nationalism and nationalist policies during the interwar period, and a different kind of globally integrated economy had to be rebuilt by policymakers and businesspeople in the post-World War II world.

We discussed not only potential lessons of earlier waves of nationalism de-globalization, but also the uses of the past by politicians, and the way in which corporate strategies can be shaped in the long term by historical experiences.

Ultimately, the discussion revolved around the relevance of history for understanding managerial choices and consequences in the face of nationalism in our own time.

AOM PDW on Historical methods

*** Apologies for cross-posting ***

 

PDW on “Historical Methods for Management and Organizational Research”

 

Coordinators

Stephanie Decker, Aston Business School

Diego M. Coraiola, U. of Alberta

 

Participants

William Foster, U. of Alberta

JoAnne Yates, MIT Sloan School of Management

Matthias Kipping, Schulich School of Bus, York U.

Michael Rowlinson, U. of Exeter

Christina Lubinski, Copenhagen Business School

 

Program Information

Session Type: PDW Workshop

Program Session: 107 | Submission: 12154 | Sponsor(s): (MH, CMS)

Scheduled: Friday, Aug 4 2017 12:15PM – 2:45PM at Hyatt Regency Atlanta in Embassy Hall E

 

 

Description

The PDW will be divided in two parts.

  1. In the first part the participants will present on topics related to the use of historical methods in management and organizational research. After the presentations we will have time for questions and answers from the audience.
  2. In the second part the participants will be distributed in roundtables and the audience will be invited to join them to discuss specific topics of the practice and publishing of historical research in management journals and receive feedback on their research projects.

 

Registration

***No registration required.

 

We do not require a formal registration. However, if you are planning to join us, we strongly encourage you to prepare a brief summary of a research project you are working on together with any doubts or puzzling issues you have been facing that you might want to discuss and get feedback on during the roundtables.

 

Abstract

Historical approaches to management and organizations have seen many promising developments in recent years, with several articles, special issues and edited books highlighting the important contribution that historical research can make to our understanding of contemporary organizations. Theoretical debates on the status of historical approaches within management and organization studies have dominated so far. These are important as they determine what kind of historical methods align with scholars’ epistemological and theoretical approach. Hence this PDW has two aims: to introduce scholars interested in the more practical questions of how we can use historical methods for organizational research to a range of option, and by highlighting the methodological implications of using specific historical approaches. This PDW will bring together several scholars who have used historical methodologies in their research. Their presentations will introduce participants to a range of methodologies and offer them the opportunity to subsequently discuss the relevance of these approaches for participants’ research projects in small groups in the second half of the session.

 

 

 

LAEMOS 2018 – Organizational History & Memory

 LAEMOS 2018

 Sub-Theme Proposal –  Organizational History and Memory

Diego M. Coraiola – Universidade Positivo, Brazil (dcoraiola@gmail.com)

Roy Suddaby – University of Victoria, Canada (rsuddaby@uvic.ca)

Maria Jose Murcia – University of British Columbia, Canada and IAE Universidad Austral, Argentina (majosemurcia@gmail.com)

Mar Pérezts – EMLYON Business School, France (perezts@em-lyon.com)

Bill Cooke – York University, UK (bill.cooke@york.ac.uk)

The notion of organizational resilience implies an implicit theory of organizations in time. Organizational survival lies in the ability of adapting to present and future demands from the environment as well as remaining true to an organization’s essence. Simply put, resilience is about being able to change and yet to remain the same. Reaching a proper balance between the old and the new or the past and the future is an ambidexterous act of exploration and exploitation or a paradox of similarity-distinctiveness. It involves establishing links between the legacies of organizational identities established in the past to aspirational strategies of an imagined future organization. However, there is still little knowledge of how the connections between the present and past of organizational action are created and sustained over time.

There is mixed evidence about the role of the past and history in organization survival. The past, it seems, can both enable and constrain adaptation and change. While for some scholars history defines the boundaries of organizational action and the possibilities of organizational resilience (David, 1985; Hannan & Freeman, 1989; Marquis, 2003; Porter, 1998; Teece, Pisano, & Shuen, 1997), for others the meaning of past actions and events is open for reinterpretation and reshaping through present actions and capabilities. (Coraiola, Foster, & Suddaby, 2015; Mena, Rintamäki, Fleming, & Spicer, 2016; Suddaby & Foster, 2016; Suddaby, Foster, & Trank, 2010; Zundel, Holt, & Popp, 2016). Empirical research on the mnemonics of organizational life might provide a better understanding of the organizational capabilities in generating alternative paths and adapting to changing environmental conditions and at the same time remaining true to themselves.

Our goal for this sub-theme, therefore, is to encourage theory on the mnemonic processes managers and organizations engage with in order to generate continuity and change with the past in ways that assure organizational survival and advantage them in the present and future. This calls for great variety of theoretical perspectives and empirical settings in order to start generating the cumulative evidence about the influences of historical legacies and the organizational ability for managing the past. Submissions focusing on the mnemonics of organizational resilience could look at:

  1.  What are the implications of past managerial action for organizational success and survival (Greve & Rao, 2014; Marquis, 2003; Schrempf-Stirling, Palazzo, & Phillips, 2016; Sydow & Schreyögg, 2013)?
  2.  What are the practices and routines organizations engage with in order to balance the reproduction and renovation of the past (Coraiola, Suddaby, Foster, 2017; Suddaby, Foster, Quinn-Trank, 2010)?
  3.  How managers use history to manage processes of organizational change (Brunninge, 2009; Maclean, Harvey, Sillince, & Golant, 2014; Ybema, 2010)?
  4.  How organizational identity is created and reproduced over time through various processes of remembering and forgetting (Anteby & Molnár, 2012; Ravasi & Schultz, 2006; Schultz & Hernes, 2013; Suddaby, Foster, & Trank, 2016)?
  5.  How organizations develop mnemonic practices to manage legitimacy threats and corporate scandals (Janssen, 2012; Mena, Rintamäki, Fleming, & Spicer, 2016)?
  6.  What are the boundary conditions around the uses of organizational mnemonics to foster organizational resilience (Foster, Coraiola, Suddaby, Kroezen, & Chandler, Forthcoming; Zundel et al, 2016)?
  7.  How management and organization scholars contribute to the understanding and the engagement of managers and organizations with the past (Lasewicz, 2015; Suddaby, 2016; Taylor, Bell, & Cooke, 2009).

The focus of this sub-theme is thus to provide new and more encompassing evidence about the enabling and constraining effects of the past for organizational resilience and survival. Researchers are encouraged to submit papers for this sub-theme with theoretical, methodological, and empirical contributions. Our goal is to foster discussions around the influence of the past, present, and future of managerial action on organizational continuity and change.

References

Anteby, M., & Molnár, V. (2012). Collective Memory Meets Organizational Identity: Remembering to Forget in a Firm’s Rhetorical History. Academy of Management Journal, 55(3), 515-540.

Brunninge, O. (2009). Using history in organizations: How managers make purposeful reference to history in strategy processes. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 22(1), 8-26.

Coraiola, D. M., Foster, W. M., & Suddaby, R. (2015). Varieties of History in Organization Studies. In P. G. McLaren, A. J. Mills & T. G. Weatherbee (Eds.), The Routledge Companion to Management & Organizational History (pp. 206-221). New York: Routledge.

David, P. A. (1985). Clio and the Economics of QWERTY. The American Economic Review, 75(2), 332-337.

Foster, W. M., Coraiola, D. M., Suddaby, R., Kroezen, J., & Chandler, D. (Forthcoming). The strategic use of historical narratives: A theoretical framework. Business History.

Greve, H. R., & Rao, H. (2014). History and the present: Institutional legacies in communities of organizations. Research in organizational behavior, 34, 27-41.

Hannan, M. T., & Freeman, J. (1989). Organizational Ecology. New York: Oxford University Press.

Janssen, C. I. (2012). Addressing Corporate Ties to Slavery: Corporate Apologia in a Discourse of Reconciliation. Communication Studies, 63(1), 18-35.

Lasewicz, P. C. (2015). Forget the Past? Or History Matters? Selected Academic Perspectives on the Strategic Value of Organizational Pasts. The American Archivist, 78(1), 59-83.

Maclean, M., Harvey, C., Sillince, J. A. A., & Golant, B. D. (2014). Living up to the past? Ideological sensemaking in organizational transition. Organization, 21(4), 543-567.

Marquis, C. (2003). The Pressure of the Past: Network Imprinting in Intercorporate Communities. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48(4), 655-689.

Mena, S., Rintamäki, J., Fleming, P., & Spicer, A. (2016). On the Forgetting of Corporate Irresponsibility. Academy of Management Review, 41(4), 720-738.

Porter, M. E. (1998). Cluster and the new economics of competition. Harvard Business Review, 76(6), 77-90.

Ravasi, D., & Schultz, M. (2006). Responding to organizational identity threats: Exploring the role of organizational culture. Academy of Management Journal, 49(3), 433-458.

Schrempf-Stirling, J., Palazzo, G., & Phillips, R. (2016). Historic Corporate Social Responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 41(4), 700-719.

Schultz, M., & Hernes, T. (2013). A Temporal Perspective on Organizational Identity. Organization Science, 24(1), 1-21.

Suddaby, R. (2016). Toward a Historical Consciousness: Following the Historic Turn in Management Thought. M@n@gement: Revue officielle de l’Association Internationale de Management Stratégique, 19(1), 46-60.

Suddaby, R., & Foster, W. M. (2016). 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. In J. A. C. Baum & J. Lampel (Eds.), Advances in Strategic Management: The Globalization of Strategy Research (pp. 147-173). Bingley: Emerald.

Suddaby, R., Foster, W. M., & Trank, C. Q. (2016). Re-membering: Rhetorical History as Identity-Work. In M. G. Pratt , M. Schultz, B. E. Ashforth & D. Ravasi (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Organizational Identity (pp. 297-316). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Sydow, J., & Schreyögg, G. (2013). Self-reinforcing processes in and among organizations. Hampshire: Palgrave.

Taylor, S., Bell, E., & Cooke, B. (2009). Business history and the historiographical operation. Management & Organizational History, 4(2), 151-166.

Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic Capabilities and Strategic Management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509-533.

Ybema, S. (2010). Talk of change: Temporal contrasts and collective identities. Organization Studies, 31(4), 481-503.

Zundel, M., Holt, R., & Popp, A. (2016). Using history in the creation of organizational identity. Management & Organizational History, 1-25.

 

Note: We thank Maria Del Pilar Acosta Collazos, Sébastien Mena, and William M. Foster for their contribution in developing the proposal for this sub-theme.

Between Past and Present: Sub-Plenary at EGOS 2017

Today’s sub-plenary “Between Past and Present – History in Organization and Organizing” at EGOS 2017 in Copenhagen brought together leading scholars in History and Organization Studies to discuss recent research on time and history.

The three keynote speakers Stephanie Decker, Roy Suddaby and Anders Ravn Sorensen illustrated the plurality in both the conceptualization of organizational time and in how history is researched. The talks triggered a lively debate on how history matters, to whom it matters, and which (often implicit) theories of history shape organizational research.

Chair: Mads Mordhorst

Stephanie Decker – Making sense of the Past: History vs. memory

Roy Suddaby – Institutional Memory as a Dynamic Capability

Anders Ravn Sorensen – Uses of history in action: CBS’ anniversary

IMG_8131IMG_3643

IMG_3639IMG_3641IMG_3644

Workshop report: Pop Nostalgia

The German Historical Institute published a workshop report on an interesting event on pop nostalgia & uses of the past that took place last year here: https://www.ghil.ac.uk/pop_nostalgia.html

Pop Nostalgia: The Uses of the Past in Popular Culture

 

Pop nostalgia, we are told, is everywhere. Our current golden age of television—from Mad Men to Vinyl, Downton Abbey to Call the Midwife—lovingly recreates earlier periods of the twentieth century, while club nights devoted to the 1980s or 1990s allow us to return to our youth. What is more, popular culture is, in the words of music journalist Simon Reynolds, addicted to its own past. It not only reminisces, it revives, reissues, remixes earlier forms and styles instead of coming up with genuinely new. Finally, our most modern technologies are always also time machines: producing sepia-coloured images of the present for an anticipated nostalgic recollection in the future.

These very different cultural phenomena, which are often subsumed under the term nostalgia, raise a number of still under-explored questions. How new is this development, given that period films are as old as the cinema and that popular culture and music has drawn on earlier periods as long as it exists? Can the recycling of old styles and forms not also be highly creative and result in innovations? Are period settings and costumes, retro and vintage styles as such indicative and synonymous with nostalgia? Is it really nostalgia that drives our interest in and our engagement with the past? And if not what other motivations are at play? What role, for example, have media technologies such as film and the internet played in preserving the culture of the past in the present?

These are some of the questions the workshop Pop Nostalgia addresses. It explores the uses of the past in popular culture across all media and genre, from literature, cinema, television, and video games to theme park, club nights and sports events. It is interested not only in representations of the past but also in their production and circulation as well as in audiences and reception. The workshop is particularly interested in the historical dimension of pop nostalgia.

AOM PDW: Frontiers of Digital History Methods

Academy of Management Meeting, Atlanta

PDW Workshop

Frontiers of Digital History Methods and Tools for Management, Organization, and History Scholars

Friday, Aug 4 2017 2:00PM – 4:00PM
Session Type: PDW Workshop
Submission: 16488
Sponsor: MH
Scheduled: Friday, Aug 4 2017 2:00PM – 4:00PM at Hyatt Regency Atlanta in Hanover Hall E

Organizer: Robin Gustafsson, Aalto U.
Organizer: Mirko Ernkvist, Ratio Institute
Presenter: Charles Edward Harvey, Newcastle U.
Presenter: Mirko Ernkvist, Ratio Institute
Presenter: Mairi Maclean, U. of Bath
Presenter: Johann Peter Murmann, U. of New South Wales
Presenter: Michael Rowlinson, U. of Exeter
Presenter: David A. Kirsch, U. of Maryland

This PDW This PDW sets out to provide a broad overview and insights to management, organization, and history scholars at large on the current research forefront in how digital databases, methods and tools could contribute to the integration of management, organization, and history research. Overall the PDW centers on the idea for outlining opportunities and current frontier work with digital methods and tools for systematic digital reconstruction of historical sources, rigor and transparency of analysis and inference from evidence. These methodological advances enable new forms of scholarship and research groups collaborations. This PDW will: (1) introduce the participants to the historical developments of digital databases, tools and methods; (2) provide perspectives by forerunner management, organization, and business history researchers on methodological advantages, challenges and opportunities with digital history methods and tools for the integration of management, organization, and historical research; (3) present leading recent research work with digital methods and tools using large-scale digitized historical sources and evidence; (4) provide ample of time for Q&As and open discussions.

Ethnography Symposium Manchester 2017

Ethnography symposium

History & Ethnography Track

Stephanie Decker & John Hassard

 

Thursday 31 August 2017

14:00-15:30         Session 1 – Ethnographies of Work, Workplaces, and Space

Guel Oczan (University of Istanbul): “At the Interface of History and Ethnography: Doing Research on Craftspeople, Shopkeepers and Apprentices in Istanbul”

Hiral Patel (University of Reading): “Exhibitions: Sites of intersection between history and ethnography”

Smitha Sebastian, Alison Hirst, Simon Down (Anglia Ruskin University) “Making sense of workplace and organizational ethnographies: A historical perspective”

Friday 1 September 2017

10:00-11:00         Session 2 – History and Ethnography in research practice

David Weir (York St. John’s University) “I have been here before:  reflections on the New Industrial Strategy”

Stella Stoycheva, Giovanni Favero (Ca’Foscari University, Venice) “Research strategies for ethnostatistics in organization studies”

11:00-11:30         Coffee break

11:30-13:00        Session 3 – Historicizing Ethnography

Budhaditya Das (Ambedkar University Delhi) “Coercion, concessions and trusteeship: a historical anthropology of state rule in post-colonial central India”

Marie Leth Meilvang (Univeristy of Copenhagen) “Historicizing professional practice”

Stephanie Decker, John Hassard: Closing remarks

13:00-14:00         Lunch

AOM2017 Meet the editors session

Session Type: PDW Workshop

Submission: 10093 | Sponsor(s): (MH)

 

Meet the Editors

Friday 10.30-12.00pm, Hyatt Regency Atlanta, Embassy Hall G 
Organizer: James M. Wilson, U. of Glasgow 

Presenter: Stephanie Decker, Aston Business School 

Presenter: Cheryl McWatters, U. of Ottawa 

Presenter: Paul Miranti, Rutgers U. 

The editors of Business History will provide a general discussion of their journal, describing its aims and scope, along with their general policies and practices regarding submissions. They will also discuss what they perceive to be current hot topics or emerging trends in the field of Management History. The editors and/or representatives of the Accounting History Review and Accounting History will discuss current topics and emerging interests in the field. They will also describe their journals’ general policies and practices regarding submissions. There will be sufficient time to discuss in general terms any individual projects conference attendees may have in mind for publication.

Search Terms: Business History | Editors | Journal

AOM 2017 PDW on historical methods

Session Type: PDW Workshop

Submission: 12154 | Sponsor(s): (MH, CMS)

 

Historical Methods for Management and Organizational Research

Friday 12.15-2.45pm, Hyatt Regency Atlanta, Embassy Hall E
Coordinator: Stephanie Decker, Aston Business School 

Coordinator: Diego Coraiola, U. of Alberta 

Participant: William Foster, U. of Alberta 

Participant: Sarah Robinson, U. of Leicester 

Participant: JoAnne Yates, MIT Sloan School of Management 

Participant: Matthias Kipping, Schulich School of Bus, York U. 

Participant: Michael Rowlinson, U. of Exeter 

Presenter: Christina Lubinski, Copenhagen Business School 

Historical approaches to management and organizations have seen many promising developments in recent years, with several articles, special issues and edited books highlighting the important contribution that historical research can make to our understanding of contemporary organizations. Theoretical debates on the status of historical approaches within management and organization studies have dominated so far. These are important as they determine what kind of historical methods align with scholars’ epistemological and theoretical approach. Hence this PDW has two aims: to introduce scholars interested in the more practical questions of how we can use historical methods for organizational research to a range of option, and by highlighting the methodological implications of using specific historical approaches. This PDW will bring together several scholars who have used historical methodologies in their research. Their presentations will introduce participants to a range of methodologies and offer them the opportunity to subsequently discuss the relevance of these approaches for participants’ research projects in small groups in the second half of the session.

Search Terms: Methodology | Historical Research | Management and Organization Research