Call for papers. ‘Business and the law: historical perspectives on legal change.’ Deadline extended to 31 October.

Special Issue of Management and Organizational History: Business and the Law. Historical Perspectives on Legal Change

Firms act in tightly regulated legal environments. Yet as new products, production processes, and economic practices emerged that environment has been constantly questioned, undermined, and rebuilt. At the same time, legal innovations challenged established economic practices like the ban on child labor or new cartel laws. Assuming that innovations were always in line with the legal system or that firms simply complied with new laws is misleading. Usually, the more accurate picture was that of a highly contingent process of negotiation and rule breaking. In the long term, firms needed to succeed in positioning their products and services as legitimate and inside the law. To see this process as a one way street of political primacy would be historically incorrect and a bad assumption to solve current problems of regulation. Given the fundamental importance of the alignment, legal change figures as a central explanatory problem for understanding the course of economic development.
The aim of the SI is to understand legal change as a contingent change in routines that affected the way businesses and courts interpreted the “rules of the game”. Such a change could manifest itself in written law or lead to a fundamentally different way of interpreting it. In both cases the focus of the papers should be on economic and legal practices, i.e. on the question what the law meant in its historical context and how it actually affected economic actions. We are looking for theoretical work as well as empirical case studies that help to shed light on the historical transformations of legal institutions at the intersection of businesses and the law. Specifically, we are looking for papers that address at least one of the following research questions.

1. The Relation of Firm Behavior and the Law: Conceptual Clarifications and Historical Perspectives
2. Direct Intervention: The Practice of Political Entrepreneurship and Its Effects
3. Subtle Evasion: The Stubbornness of Business Routines in the Face of Legal Change
4. Legal Provocations: Schumpeterian “Rule Breaking” and Business Scandals

Each submission will initially be reviewed by the guest editors to determine its suitability for the special issue. Before final acceptance papers will also be double-blind reviewed. Publication of the special issue is planned for the year 2019.
For further information, please contact sebastian.teupe@uni-bayreuth.de
The deadline for submissions is 31 October 2018.

Editorial information

Guest Editor: Sebastian Teupe, University of Bayreuth, Germany (Sebastian.teupe@uni-bayreuth.de)
Guest Editor: Louis Pahlow, Goethe-Universität Frankfurt/Main, Germany (Pahlow@jur.uni-frankfurt.de)

Advertisements

CFP: New Histories of Business Schools and How They May Inspire New Futures

Academy of Management Learning and Education

New Histories of Business Schools and How They May Inspire New Futures

Initial submissions should be received by: March 31, 2020

Scheduled for Publication: June 2021

Guest Editors:

  • Patricia Genoe McLaren, Wilfrid Laurier University
  • JC Spender, Kozminski University
  • Stephen Cummings, Victoria University of Wellington
  • Todd Bridgman, Victoria University of Wellington
  • Ellen O’Connor, Dominican University of California
  • Christina Lubinski, Copenhagen Business School
  • Gabrielle Durepos, Mount Saint Vincent University (Canada)

 

We might do well to re-examine what we are doing and show the executive judgment and courage necessary to implement radical change (Khurana & Spender 2012: 636).

Business schools are the institutional locus of management learning and education. In recent years, we have gained a greater understanding of how their structures, processes, and power dynamics influence pedagogy and curricula, management theory and research, faculty, students, graduates, and society more broadly. We are also witnessing growing research into, and discussion about, the relative lack of innovation in management theory development, research, pedagogy, and curricula (Alvesson & Sandberg, 2012). While there have been a small number of inspirational works that have sought to push us towards changing business schools and business education (Augier and March, 2011; Hassard, 2012; Khurana 2007; Spender, 2016), they have not yet spurred the change we might have hoped for.
One under-explored route to encourage innovation in this regard is examining how our historical understanding of all aspects of business schools – including curriculum, pedagogy, research, structure, processes, stakeholders, power, and politics – may be limiting change. Histories highlight particular characters and plots but what we do not include – what we write out of history – is just as important as what is written in (Jenkins, 2003). History is constitutive, in that our own interpretations of the past define and shape our present and our future (Wadhwani & Bucheli, 2014). Compared with other stochastic fields of study, histories of management and business are simplistically linear and mono-cultural. This constrains how we see business schools in the present, and can subsequently limit their future development (Cummings & Bridgman, 2016).
The conventional history of business education tends to follow the emergence of American business schools: from the founding of the Wharton School in 1881, to the rapid growth of business school enrollment within American universities leading up to the 1950s, to the standardization of the schools after the publication of the Gordon-Howell and Pierson reports in 1959 (Hommel & Thomas, 2014). This history has been crafted over many years and now goes largely unchallenged. But it begs the questions: why is this the story we tell, who gains and who loses from its telling, and what events and people are missing from a narrative that should be inspirational for a broad range of people?
North American business education has been studied at various points in a straightforward assessment style – what are business schools doing, how could they
“improve” (Bossard & Dewhurst, 1931; Gordon & Howell, 1959; Pierson, 1959; Porter & McKibbin, 1988), and also with a more complex analysis of context, history, power, and influence (Engwall, Kipping, Usdiken, 2016; Khurana, 2007; Pettigrew, Corneul, & Hommel, 2014). Work has been done on the history of European management education (cf. Engwall, 2004; Harker, Caemmerer, & Hynes, 2016; Kieser, 2004; Kipping, Usdiken, & Puig, 2004; Tiratsoo, 2004; Usdiken, 2004), and some have looked at the global South (Cooke & Alcadipani, 2015). We are beginning to see alternative histories of the development of management theory and education (Bridgman, Cummings, & McLaughlin, 2016; Dye, Mills, & Weatherbee, 2005; Hassard, 2012; Peltonen, 2015). However, what about histories of schools of business and commerce from other parts of the world (Asia, Africa, Australasia, South America) in more detail? Or from earlier centuries? Or different examples from North America or Europe that did not survive or later morphed toward the standard form?
This special issue seeks to move things forward by looking differently when we look back. It encourages submissions that explore emerging interests, historical barriers to change, and their interrelationships by focusing on the emergence and development of business schools as complex entities that are interwoven with universities, the business community, government, and civil society. It also seeks submissions that explore how these broader understandings may stimulate innovation in the way we configure business schools and, consequently, how we teach, conduct research, view our profession, and relate to our stakeholders.
In this call for papers, we – professors/educators, researchers/inquirers, sufferers/critics, and aspirational as well as actual change agents – are the organizational actors, and business schools are our reflective historical setting; more importantly, they are our actual environment. We have a unique opportunity to push management theory, research methods, and interdisciplinarity to better understand and, more importantly, to reinvent business school(s) in light of what is socially or personally meaningful. We have contextual richness, personal and professional stakes, and a sense of crisis. Being able to change our practices from within, we are uniquely situated to bring scholarship, formal positioning, and inhabited experience to bear.
Better historical scholarship could, therefore, help us to change ourselves. To engage historical sensibilities and methods, and empirical richness, to push theory and change institutions. As a call for spurring this process we welcome contributions that address the following questions:
  1. What people, events, curriculum, pedagogy, form, and research of business schools’ past have been overlooked by conventional historical narratives?
  2. What role could new histories play in debates about how business schools should develop? Can new understandings of the past inspire us to think differently for the future?
  3. How can we write reflexive or critical histories of business schools that expose the power and politics of business education and what we teach, or do not teach, students?
  4. Are histories being used within business schools or other organizations, such as accreditation bodies, academies and societies, to perpetuate traditional structures and/or norms? Why and to what effect?
  5. What are the ‘invented traditions’ that support any or all aspects of the institution of business schools and what purpose were they invented to serve?
  6. What are the stories of the development of business education outside of North America or prior to the late 19th century? Are these different or the same as the current narrative? How, why, and what can we learn from these alternative histories?
  7. How has history traditionally been taught in business schools? What are the positive and limiting effects of this pedagogy? How could we teach history differently?
  8. Why should business school students learn more (or less) history? Or learn it differently?
  9. How might management scholars using history in their research influence business education?
Call on AMLE Website

References
Alvesson, M,. & Sandberg, J. 2012. Has management studies lost its way? Ideas for more imaginative and innovative research. Journal of Management Studies, 50(1): 128-152.

Augier, M. and March, J. 2011. The roots, rituals, and rhetorics of change: North
American business schools after the second World War. Stanford University Press.

Bossard, J. H. S., & Dewhurst, J. F. 1931. University education for business: A study of
existing needs and practices. Philadelphia. PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.

Bridgman, T., Cummings, S., & McLaughlin, C. 2016. Restating the case: How revisiting the development of the case method can help us think differently about the future of the business school. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 15(4): 724-741.

Cooke, B., & Alcadipani, R. 2015. Toward a global history of management education: The case of the Ford Foundation and the São Paulo School of Business Administration, Brazil. Academy of Management Learning & Education,14(4): 482-499.

Cummings, S. & Bridgman, T. 2016. The limits and possibilities of history: How a wider,
deeper and more engaged understanding of business history can foster innovative thinking. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 15(2): 250-267.

Dye, K., Mills, A. J., & Weatherbee, T. 2005. Maslow: Man interrupted: Reading
management theory in context. Management Decision, 43(10): 1375-1395.

Engwall, L. 2004. The Americanization of Nordic management education. Journal of
Management Inquiry, 13(2): 109-117.

Engwall, L., Kipping, M., & Usdiken, B. 2016. Defining management: Business
schools, consultants, media. New York: Routledge.

Gordon, R. A., & Howell, J. E. 1959. Higher education for business. New York:
Columbia University Press.

Harker, M. J., Caemmerer, B., & Hynes, N. 2016. Management education by the French
Grandes Ecoles de Commerce: Past, present, and an uncertain future. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 15(3): 549-568.

Hassard, J. 2012. Rethinking the Hawthorne Studies: The Western Electric research in its
social, political and historical context. Human Relations, 65(11): 1431-1461.

Hommel, U., & Thomas, H. 2014. Research on business schools. In A. M. Pettigrew, E.
Corneul, & U. Hommel (Eds.), The institutional development of business
schools: 8-36. Oxford: Oxford University PRess.

Jenkins, K. 2003. Refiguring history: New thoughts on an old discipline. London, U.K.:
Routledge.

Khurana, R. 2007. From higher aims to hired hands: The social transformation of
American business schools and the unfulfilled promise of management as a profession. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Khurana, R., & Spender, J. C. 2012. Herbert A. Simon on What Ails Business Schools: More than ‘A Problem in Organizational Design’. Journal of Management Studies, 49: 619–639.

Kieser, A. 2004. The Americanization of academic management education in Germany.
Journal of Management Inquiry, 13(2): 90-97.

Kipping, M., Usdiken, B., & Puig, N. 2004. Imitation, tension, and hybridization:
Multiple “Americanizations” of management education in Mediterranean Europe. Journal of Management Inquiry, 13(2): 98-108.

Peltonen, T. 2015. History of management thought in context: The case of Elton Mayo in Australia. In P. G. McLaren, A. J. Mills, & T. G. Weatherbee (Eds.), The Routledge Companion to Management and Organizational History. Abindon, UK: Sage.

Pettigrew, A. M., Corneul, E., & Hommel, U. 2014. The institutional development of
business schools. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Pierson, F. C. 1959. The education of American business men: A study in university-
college programs in business administration. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Porter, L. W., & McKibbin, L. E. 1988. Management education and development: Drift
or thrust into the 21st century? New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company.

Spender, J.C. 2016. How management education’s past shapes its present. BizEd.

Tiratsoo, N. 2004. The “Americanization” of management education in Britain. Journal of Management Inquiry, 13(2): 118-126.

Usdiken, B. 2004. Americanization of European management education in historical and
comparative perspective. Journal of Management Inquiry, 13(2): 87-89.

Wadhwani, D., & Bucheli, M. 2014. The future of the past in management and organization studies. In D. Wadhwani, & M. Bucheli (Eds.), Organizations in Time: History, Theory, Methods. New York: Oxford University Press.

Windrush scandal: a historian on why destroying archives is never a good idea

Reblogged from the Imperial and Global Forum:

Imperial & Global Forum

File 20180424 57604 lrbqk.jpg?ixlib=rb 1.1
Sanwal Deen/Unsplash

Dora Vargha
University of Exeter

Archival practices rarely make headlines. Databases are sexy, archives less so – at least for most people. Whenever we do read about archives, it’s almost exclusively in the context of something disappearing. Apparently, we never know a good thing until it’s gone.

Most recently, it transpired that the Home Office apparently destroyed Windrush landing cards eight years ago. These, it now seems, were crucial documents in establishing the legal status of Caribbean-born residents who arrived in the 1950s and 1960s. The question of exactly who is to take the blame for this action remains under debate.

This is not the first time the government has had to admit to this kind of practice. A few months ago the Foreign Office admitted to its role in key documents “disappearing” from the National Archives. Among them were papers on the colonial administration of…

View original post 773 more words

Management History Division: Get Involved and VOTE

In recent years management and organizational history has become an exciting and rapidly changing field, with new ideas and approaches transforming the field and many publication opportunities at leading journals. The AOM’s Management History Division is one of the key institutional foundations for these developments, but the Division needs involvement and support from scholars who are engaged and care about the future of the field. So please get involved. The AOM recently announced the release of the ballot for division elections. If you are already a member of the MH Division, please take time to vote!!! If you are not a member but care about management history, please join the Division, vote now, and join us in Chicago!  The instructions for joining the MH Division can be found here: http://aom.org/FAQs/Membership/How-do-I-change-or-add-an-additional-division-or-interest-group-to-my-profile-.aspx

CFP: Business History Conference 2019, Cartagena

Reblogged from the Past Speaks:

The Past Speaks

The 2019 annual meeting of the Business History Conference will be held in Cartagena de Indias, Colombia, on March 14–16. The theme of the meeting will be “Globalization and De-Globalization: Shifts of Power and Wealth.” The recent phenomena of the spread of populist and economic nationalist regimes throughout North America, Europe, Asia and elsewhere taking positions against the major trading blocks and the free movement of people and goods make the topic of this conference very timely. The conference aims to concentrate on business history research agendas that enable a nuanced understanding of the phenomena of globalization and de-globalization.

The conference theme encourages contributions from a variety of approaches to business history research, covering a broad range of geographies and periods. The program committee of Marcelo Bucheli (co-chair), Andrea Lluch (co-chair), Takafumi KurosawaEspen StorliLaura Sawyer, and Teresa da Silva Lopes (BHC president) invites paper proposals…

View original post 730 more words

Imagining Britain’s economic future, c.1800-1975

Reblogged from the Imperial & Global Forum:

Imperial & Global Forum

David Thackeray, Richard Toye, and Andrew Thompson
University of Exeter

This book considers how Britain has imagined its economic role in the wider world and how British ideas have influenced global debates about market relationships between the start of the nineteenth century and the UK’s first European referendum. In doing so, the authors explore the interplay between the high political thought of theorists, the activities of officials and businesspeople, and the everyday experience of the wider public. Across the contributions to this book there is a consideration of the competing factors which affected market decisions and the processes of ‘economic imagination’.

The economist Joseph Schumpeter put the concept of imagination at the heart of the entrepreneurial process. It was this quality which, above all, businesspeople required if they were to succeed: ‘the capacity of seeing things in a way which proves afterwards to be true, even though it cannot be…

View original post 675 more words

Postdoctoral Position in Entrepreneurial History at University of Southern California

The Lloyd Greif Center for Entrepreneurial Studies at the Marshall School of Business, University of Southern California, seeks applicants for a postdoctoral scholar interested in entrepreneurial history.

The postdoctoral researcher will work under the supervision of Professors Noam Wasserman and Christina Lubinski of the Greif Center and in conjunction with Professor Dan Wadhwani of the University of the Pacific. Professor Wasserman is the founding director of the Greif Center’s Founder Central initiative and Professor Lubinski leads its entrepreneurial-history activities.  Founder Central’s new course on Entrepreneurial History will debut in the Spring of 2019.

The position is for 1 year, with the potential of extending this to 2 years. In addition to research, the postdoc will teach one entrepreneurship or general business course per year if qualified, and will receive mentoring in this teaching role.

The Greif Center is among the nation’s leaders in entrepreneurship education and research. Its faculty includes a diverse mix of researchers and practitioners. This year, our undergraduate entrepreneurship program was ranked #4 and our graduate program #8 by US News and World Report. The Greif Center is one of the organizers of the West Coast Entrepreneurship Research Symposium and the sponsor of the Greif Entrepreneurship Research Impact Award — given annually at the Academy of Management conference. In addition to offering courses in the school’s undergraduate and MBA programs, we offer specialized graduate degrees in social entrepreneurship (MSSE) and innovation (MSEI).

Requirements: You should have a Ph.D. (or expect to complete your Ph.D. by September 2018) in history or should have engaged in historically-oriented work in a related discipline (e.g., management, sociology, anthropology, law, economics). Candidates should be interested in historical perspectives on entrepreneurship and its role in socio-economic change. Experience with archival and primary source research is preferred. You will be expected to participate in at least one existing research project while also having time to continue developing your own research.

Qualified candidates should email the following documents to entrepreneur@marshall.usc.edu:

  • Cover letter
  • Curriculum vitae, specifying research, teaching, and work experience
  • Research statement
  • Teaching statement
  • Two letters of recommendation

Timing: Review of applications will begin immediately, and continue until the position is filled. The position is expected to start September 2018, although the start date is flexible.

For questions about the position, please contact Christina Lubinski (cl.mpp@cbs.dk) or Noam Wasserman (nwasserm@marshall.usc.edu)

USC Marshall is renowned for its high-ranking undergraduate, graduate, international and executive education programs, an exceptional faculty engaged in leading-edge research, a diverse and creative student body, and a commitment to technological advancement. The research productivity of Marshall’s 200 full-time faculty ranks among the top 15 business schools in the world. For more information about the Marshall School of Business at the University of Southern California, please go to: http://www.marshall.usc.edu.

The University of Southern California (USC), founded in 1880, is located in the heart of downtown L.A. and is the largest private employer in the City of Los Angeles. USC is an equal-opportunity educator and employer, proudly pluralistic and firmly committed to providing equal opportunity for outstanding persons of every race, gender, creed and background. The University particularly encourages women, members of underrepresented groups, veterans and individuals with disabilities to apply. USC will make reasonable accommodations for qualified individuals with known disabilities unless doing so would result in an undue hardship. Further information is available by contacting uschr@usc.edu.

 

Financial History Review New Scholars workshop

New Scholars Fast-Track Workshop 

13 June 2018

Torino, Italy

Financial History Review invites submissions of research papers from advanced PhD students and recent postdoctoral researchers (with less than five years from completing their PhD) in banking, financial and monetary history for a

eabh in cooperation with Fondazione 1563 per l’Arte e la Cultura della Compagnia di San Paolo and Compagnia di San Paolo

Papers on any topic and period are welcome. Please find the Call for Papers and additional information at http://bankinghistory.org/wp-content/uploads/2018_Torino_FHR_NSW_Final.pdf

Deadline is 30 April 2018

 

Using Historical Methods in Management and Organization Research

For the first time, Aston’s summer programme is offering this course on historical methods in management & organization research.

Course information:

Aston Business School

9 July 2018

 

Management and organizational researchers are increasingly interested in the opportunities for historical research. Even though history as a discipline does not have a similar understanding of methodology to the management and organization studies, in recent years there have been a number of publications and workshops demystifying historical approaches and analytical techniques. This one-day workshop will introduce participants to basic techniques and recent developments, as well as providing worked examples and on-hand advice for ongoing research projects.

Course outline

9.45 – 10.00        Welcome and introduction

10.00 – 12.00      Introduction to basic research techniques

12.00 – 13.00      Focus on participants’ projects

13.00 – 14.00      Lunch  break

14.00 – 15.00      Recent developments in organization history, introduction to key debates

15.00 – 16.00      Worked example: researching organizational corruption at Enron

16.00 – 17.00      How to publish organizational history: journals, rationales and strategies

17.00 – 17.15      Summary and end of seminar

 

Presenters:

 Stephanie Decker, Professor in History and Organization Studies

Adam Nix, Researcher in Organization History and Organizational Corruption

More information on: http://www.aston.ac.uk/international/aston-summer-programme-2018/why-choose-using-historical-methods-in-management-and-organization-research/

 

Fees: One day workshop: £125. This includes University-wide wifi access; lunch and refreshments.

 

 

Program Classroom Frontiers: Business History Course Development Workshop

The Copenhagen Business School PDW Series

Classroom Frontiers: Business History Course Development Workshop

 

Time: Thursday, April 5, 2018, c.9am-1:30pm

Place: Baltimore Embassy Suites Inner Harbor, 222 St Paul Pl, Baltimore, MD 21202

To register for this workshop, use the BHC annual meeting registration form.

 

9:00am-9:30am                    Welcome – Christina Lubinski (CBS)

Classroom Frontiers: Introduction and Three Pilots: Entrepreneurial History, Public History, Financial History

9:30am-10:00am                 Entrepreneurial History – Dan Wadhwani (Univ. of the Pacific)

Dan Wadhwani (in collaboration with Noam Wasserman) is currently in the process of developing a course in “Entrepreneurial History.” The plan is to offer it as a general education course at the Greif Center of Entrepreneurship, University of Southern California. The course is structured in three modules: (i) Origins of entrepreneurial capitalism (examining the big macro entrepreneurial opportunities that have transformed capitalism); (ii) From Organization Man to Entrepreneurial History (focusing on changes in technology, policy, financing, careers, and corporate strategy, which have unleashed entrepreneurial endeavors; (iii) Making History (examining techniques by which entrepreneurs use the past to make and legitimize the future.)

10:00am-10:20am              Commentator: Bill Gartner (Babson College)

10:20am-10:30am             Coffee Break

10:30am-11:00am              Public History – Ken Lipartito (Florida International University)

Ken Lipartito teaches courses on public history, where he works with students in applying history skills to a variety of non-academic spaces—museums, historic sites, government agencies, public policy organizations.  Several of his graduates have found employment outside of academia—in the Library of Congress, for the military.  In 2016-17 he was the recipient of a National Endowment for the Humanities Next Generation Ph.D Grant, to expand opportunities for history graduate students seeking employment beyond the academy.  He also runs a number of community based projects in Miami, working with institutions in creating digital archives and historical exhibits.  As a principal in the Business History Group, LLC (http://www.businesshistorygroup.com) he consults with business, government and non-profit entities to write organizational histories and provide historical expertise for legal, strategic and policy matters.

11:00am-11:20am              Commentator: Mads Mordhorst (Copenhagen Business School)

11:20am-11:30am              Coffee Break

11:30am-12:30pm           Financial History: The Great Depression in Real Time – Mary O’Sullivan (University of Geneva)

Mary O’Sullivan is teaching a course on international economic history, in which she includes a module titled “The Great Depression in Real Time” based on her latest research on economic history and economic policy. She uses a variety of different primary sources to discuss the way in which policymakers tried to understand and react to the crisis as it emerged. She is focusing in particular on policy makers at the Fed who were grappling with policy challenges related to the country’s domestic financial system.

12:30pm-12:50pm             Commentator: Per Hansen (Copenhagen Business School)

12:50pm-1:30pm               Concluding discussion