TOC BH July 2017 issue (59,1)

Original Articles

Managing political imperatives in war time: strategic responses of Philips in Australia, 1939–1945
Pierre van der Eng
Pages: 645-666 | DOI: 10.1080/00076791.2016.1259311

The genesis of the electricity supply industry in Britain: A case study of NESCo from 1889 to 1914
Tom McGovern & Tom McLean
Pages: 667-689 | DOI: 10.1080/00076791.2016.1261827

‘A fraud, a drunkard, and a worthless scamp’: estate agents, regulation, and Realtors in the interwar period
Mark Latham
Pages: 690-709 | DOI: 10.1080/00076791.2016.1261828

Bring in the brewers: business entry in the Swedish brewing industry from 1830 to 2012
Marcus Box
Pages: 710-743 | DOI: 10.1080/00076791.2016.1269751

Pioneering strategies in the digital world. Insights from the Axel Springer case
Gianvito Lanzolla & Alessandro Giudici
Pages: 744-777 | DOI: 10.1080/00076791.2016.1269752

The making of the modern retail market: economic theory, business interests and economic policy in the passage of the 1964 Resale Prices Act
Helen Mercer
Pages: 778-801 | DOI: 10.1080/00076791.2016.1270267
Comment

The decline in the British bank population since 1810 obeys a law of negative compound interest
J. J. Bissell
Pages: 802-813 | DOI: 10.1080/00076791.2017.1301430

Banks, births, and tipping points in the historical demography of British banking: A response to J.J. Bissell
Philip Garnett, Simon Mollan & R. Alexander Bentley
Pages: 814-820 | DOI: 10.1080/00076791.2017.1301429

EBHA doctoral summer school

CALL FOR APPLICATIONS
9th EBHA DOCTORAL SUMMER SCHOOL
BUSINESS HISTORY: DEBATES, CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES


Keynote Speakers
: Franco Amatori (Bocconi University), Harold James (Princeton
University), Grietjie Verhoef (University of Johannesburg)

Faculty Members: Marten Boon (Norwegian University of Science and Technology),
Ludovic Cailluet (EDHEC Business School), Andrea Colli (Bocconi University), Abe de
Jong (Rotterdam School of Management), Jeffrey Fear (University of Glasgow), Andrea
Schneider (Gesellschaft für Unternehmensgeschichte), Ben Wubs (Erasmus University)

The 9th edition of the EBHA (European Business History Association) Summer
School will take place in Ancona (Italy) from Monday, September 4th to Saturday,
September 9th, 2017. The school aims at providing doctoral students with an overview of
relevant research results and of innovative tools and methodologies in the field of Business History. It is organised jointly by the European Business History Association (EBHA), the Università Politecnica delle Marche and the Italian Association for Business History (ASSI). Students will be accommodated in the beautiful town of Ancona debating and discussing their research with leading international scholars. The title of the school will be Business History: Debates, challenges and opportunities. The school will focus on theoretical, methodological and practical issues which are of relevance for advanced research in business history. The main aim of the school is to provide students with a full understanding of the newest trends in research in the field and to provide a friendly atmosphere in which to discuss their preliminary findings with leading scholars as well as among their peers. In this respect, the program features both lectures and seminars given by faculty and student presentations of their research projects. Each student will have 20 minutes maximum to present her/his project, stressing especially: research questions and goals, methodology, sources, challenges and provisional outcomes. After her/his presentation, each student will receive questions and comments from other students and from faculty members (approx 15-20 minutes).

The organisers will cover all local costs (accommodation in a double or triple room
and food), but participants are expected to pay their own travel expenses. Participation
will be limited to 15-20 PhD students.
Those interested in attending the summer school should send the following
documents by e-mail to the academic organiser Dr. Veronica Binda
(veronica.binda@unibocconi.it):

1) a brief CV (not exceeding one page);
2) a summary of their dissertation project (not exceeding three pages);
3) (if possible) an example of their work in progress, e.g. a draft chapter or a working paper (in any language).

The deadline for applications is May 14th , 2017. A maximum of 20 participants will be selected from these applications and will be notified by June 4th, 2017.

PhD Scholarships in “Time and Societal Challenges in a Changing Global Economy”

PhD Scholarships in “Time and Societal Challenges in a Changing Global Economy”

PhD Scholarships in “Time and Societal Challenges in a Changing Global Economy”

Copenhagen Business School invites applications for 6 vacant PhD scholarships within the field of “Time and Societal Challenges in a Changing Global Economy”. The successful applicants will be organized as a cross-departmental cohort with a number of common PhD courses and other activities such as workshops. The positions will be based in the four Departments associated with the OMS Doctoral School: Department of Business and Politics (DBP), Department of Organisation (IOA), Department of Management, Politics and Philosophy (MPP) and Department of Management, Society and Communication (MSC).

Theme of the Cohort

The notions of time and temporality have increasingly become the object of study across the social sciences. Temporality refers to the linear progression of time, historicity, the perception of time, processes of sequencing and order and rates of change as well as the social organization of time. In sociology, for instance, it is becoming increasingly recognized that existing theoretical frameworks, largely rooted in traditional approaches, do not adequately explain the active role of time in a globalizing economy. In the political sciences, the historicity of practices, norms and political ideas and the concept of “political time” have received increased attention particularly in association with questions about the character of continuity and change. Furthermore, analyses of the ways in which political, institutional and ideational processes unfold over time are central to the study of political economy and the shaping of policy processes. Also, in the area of Business Studies, there is an increasing turn of attention to the strategic use of historical narratives in corporate action.

The work of the cohort will challenge prevailing chronological, linear and sequential theories of time in politics and the study of organizations to embrace an active and dynamic view of time. Using innovative theories and methods, it will seek to explain how and why temporal dynamics shape and impact contemporary challenges. These challenges include, for example, globalizing and de-globalizing processes, state capacities in an era of limited economic growth, and the changing relationships between actors, organizations and the institutional frameworks. A particular focus will be put on how temporal structures and processes of sequencing constrain, but at times also empower individual and collective actors (e.g. business, workers, policy makers, civil society representatives), and the ways in which, within that context, those actors seek to reconfigure past, present and future. The work of the cohort will furthermore explore how processes of temporal construction affect the interactions between different actors and institutions in the context of these challenges.

The proposed PhD cohort will draw upon central ideas in philosophy, sociology, political science, history, cultural studies and organization theory. Although students may choose to write a PhD within a particular disciplinary perspective they will be encouraged to draw upon some of the other disciplines that will be utilized and explored within the cohort. We see this interdisciplinary and multi-disciplinary cohort which is expected to use a range of innovative theoretical frameworks and sound research designs (including qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods alongside experimental approaches) as the only viable way forward in new research endeavors. There will be a shared understanding that differences in temporalities constituted by factors such as past and future time horizons, mechanisms of connecting past and future in the present, pace and acceleration of change, lead to increased temporal complexity.

Pool of possible topics within the overall theme

Department of Business and Politics (DBP)

• The politics and history of social challenges in a comparative perspective (such as sustainability, inequality, 4th industrial revolution)

• The political economy of European crises: politics, polity and policy
Department of Organization (IOA)

• The role of time in organizing for societal challenges

• Organizational time, learning and innovation

• Organizing time, routines and change
Department of Management, Politics and Philosophy (MPP)

• Time, history and entrepreneurship in a globalized world

• Time and transformations in private-public relations

• The philosophy of time and chronology
Department of Management, Society and Communication (MSC)

• Temporality and talk-action dynamics in CSR

• Varieties of time perceptions attached to multi-stakeholder initiatives

• Colliding temporal orders and new forms of organizing

 

The PhD programme

The PhD programme at CBS is highly international. It allows you to conduct research under the supervision of CBS professors, supported by research training courses (30 ECTS points). You are expected to participate in international research conferences and spend time abroad as a visiting PhD student. For further information on the CBS PhD programme please consult this page: http://www.cbs.dk/en/research/phd-programmes/phd-skoler
It is also required that the applicant shows an interest in joining the respective Department’s research environment. You find information on the departments here: http://www.cbs.dk/en/research/departments-and-centres
CBS PhD graduates are held in high esteem not only in academia and research institutions but also in government and business where their research qualifications are increasingly demanded. One third of CBS PhD graduates go on to employment outside universities and public research institutions.

Copenhagen Business School has a broad commitment to the excellence, distinctiveness and relevance of its teaching and research programmes. Candidates who wish to join us should demonstrate enthusiasm for working in organization of this type (highlighting, for example, relevant business, educational and dissemination activities).

For further information please contact the head of department of the respective department:

• DBP: Prof MSO Caroline de la Porte +4538153550

• IOA: Prof MSO Signe Vikkelsø +4538152827

• MPP: Prof Lotte Jensen +4538153637

• MSC: Associate Prof Dorte Salskov-Iversen +4538153181
For administrative information please contact Henrik Hermansen +45 3815 3656, heh.mpp@cbs.dk.
General information

A PhD scholarship runs for a period of 3 years, and includes teaching obligations equivalent of 1⁄2 year’s work (840 work hours). The scholarships are fully salaried positions, according to the national Danish collective agreement. The scholarship includes the tuition fees, office space, travel grants plus a salary, currently starting with per month app. DKK 23.770 (app. 3,160 euro) up to DKK 28.964 (app. 3,860 euro) depending on seniority, plus a pension contribution totaling 17,1 % of 85 per cent of the base salary.
The salary level and appointment is determined by the Ministry of Finance’s collective agreement with the Central Academic Organization.
The PhD student will be enrolled at the PhD School in Organization and Management Studies (OMS). To be considered, the candidate should have a degree at the Masters level (similar to the 3 + 2 Bologna process). An educational background in philosophy, sociology, political science, history, cultural studies and organization theory or related fields is necessary. The applicant must have successfully completed the Master’s degree before commencing a PhD at CBS. The applicants must be fluent in English.
The application must include a 5 page research proposal following the guidelines available here: http://www.cbs.dk/en/research/phd-programmes/admission
In addition to the research proposal, the application must include copies of a Master’s degree certificate or other certificates of a corresponding level, brief curriculum vitae (CV), a list of papers and publications, and one copy of a selected written work (e.g. Master’s thesis). Applicants must enclose documentation for English language skills if not mother tongue.
Recruitment procedure

The Recruitment Committee will shortlist applicants. The shortlisted applicants will be assessed by the Assessment Committee. All applicants will be notified of their status in the recruitment process shortly after the application deadline.

The applicants selected for assessment will be notified about the composition of the Assessment Committee and later in the process about the result of the assessment.

Once the recruitment process is completed each applicant will be notified of the outcome of their application.

The successful applicants are expected to start their position on September 1 2017.

 

Closing date: June 1, 2017

Copenhagen Business School must receive all application material, including all appendices (see items above), by the application deadline.

Details about Copenhagen Business School and the departments are available at www.cbs.dk.

 

Application Deadline
June 1, 2017
Apply online

BH ToC 59.4

The new issue of Business History (June 2017) is now available:

Business History

Original Articles

Keynes, Trouton and the Hector Whaling Company. A personal and professional relationship
Bjørn L. Basberg
Pages: 471-496 | DOI: 10.1080/00076791.2016.1214129

 

Strategic transformations in large Irish-owned businesses
Colm O’Gorman & Declan Curran
Pages: 497-524 | DOI: 10.1080/00076791.2016.1220938

 

Rehabilitating the intermediary: brokers and auctioneers in the nineteenth-century Anglo-Indian trade
Michael Aldous
Pages: 525-553 | DOI: 10.1080/00076791.2016.1220939

 

The obsolescing bargain model and oil: the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company 1933–1951
Neveen Abdelrehim & Steven Toms
Pages: 554-571 | DOI: 10.1080/00076791.2016.1232397

 

United we stand, divided we fall: historical trajectory of strategic renewal activities at the Scandinavian Airlines System, 1946–2012
Joseph Amankwah-Amoah, Jan Ottosson & Hans Sjögren
Pages: 572-606 | DOI: 10.1080/00076791.2016.1250743

 

Who financed the expansion of the equity market? Shareholder clienteles in Victorian Britain
Graeme G. Acheson, Gareth Campbell & John D. Turner
Pages: 607-637 | DOI: 10.1080/00076791.2016.1250744
Book Review

Le crédit à la consommation en France, 1947-1965. De la stigmatisation à la réglementation
Hubert Bonin
Pages: 638-639 | DOI: 10.1080/00076791.2015.1068515

 

Early Victorian railway excursions: ‘The million go forth’
Mark Learmonth
Pages: 639-640 | DOI: 10.1080/00076791.2016.1253638

 

Du Capitalisme familiale au Capitalisme financier? Le Cas de l’Industrie Suisse des Machines, de l’Electrotechnique et de la Métallurgie au XXe Siècle
Margrit Müller
Pages: 641-642 | DOI: 10.1080/00076791.2016.1269526

 

Handbook of cliometrics
Anna Missiaia
Pages: 642-643 | DOI: 10.1080/00076791.2016.1272895

Business History Review
Call for Papers for Special Issue of the Journal on

ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND PHILANTHROPY

Guest editors: Charles Harvey*, Mairi Maclean** and Roy Suddaby***

*Professor of Business History and Management, Newcastle University, UK
**Professor of International Business, University of Bath, UK
***Winspear Chair of Management, University of Victoria, Canada

Theme of the Special Issue

Inequality is a deeply embedded feature of the contemporary world order (Reich, 2015). In this Special Issue, we focus on the related historical processes underpinning the amassing of entrepreneurial fortunes and large scale philanthropy (Baumol & Strom, 2014). Despite rising interest in charitable giving, philanthropy and the relationship of philanthropy to entrepreneurship remain under-researched and under-theorized. Business history research has much to offer in this regard. The engagement in philanthropy by enterprising individuals and families is a feature of many historical epochs in many countries, perhaps most famously associated with the Gilded Age in the United States and names such as Andrew Carnegie and John D. Rockefeller Sr., whose philanthropic foundations remain vital social institutions today (Hall, 1992; Zunz, 2012). The opportunity exists for historical research to inform current debates through research that offers long run perspectives and critical understandings of the relationships between entrepreneurship, wealth and philanthropy, each bound up with the economic, social, political and ideological forces that have shaped the new age of inequality (Boltanski & Chiapello, 2007; Piketty, 2014).

First, we observe that the making of entrepreneurial fortunes, often within the space of a few decades, is one factor driving the rise of inequalities within and between countries (Atkinson, 2015; Atkinson, Piketty & Saez, 2012; Bourguignon, 2015; Reich, 2015; Stiglitz, 2015). We are interested in how such fortunes have been made historically and the enabling conditions that gave rise to their creation, nationally and internationally. Second, we observe that the preservation and growth of large entrepreneurial fortunes has become an economic field in its own right, populated by allied accounting, taxation, wealth management and legal professional organizations that take advantage of enabling regulatory and legal frameworks across the world (Beaverstock & Hall, 2016; Palan & Mangravati, 2016). We are interested to learn more about how dedicated organizations such as family offices (Glucksberg & Burrows, 2016) have helped the super-rich to avoid contributing more to the societies in which they were nurtured. Third, we observe that significant numbers of entrepreneurs with large fortunes have become involved in large scale philanthropic ventures, seeking social improvement by combatting widespread economic and social disadvantages (Schervish, 2016). We are interested in why some entrepreneurs became entrepreneurial philanthropists and not others, how they selected and promoted their causes, and how they institutionalized their endeavours through the creation and endowment of philanthropic foundations.

The existing literature on the making and preservation of entrepreneurial fortunes and the investment of some part of these fortunes philanthropically is sparse relative to the
importance of the topic (Taylor, Strom & Renz, 2014; Hay & Beaverstock, 2016). Harvey, Maclean, Gordon and Shaw (2011) and Shaw, Gordon, Harvey and Maclean (2013) have defined the intersection of entrepreneurship and philanthropy as entrepreneurial philanthropy: the active deployment of various forms of capital by super-rich individuals and the companies and foundations they control in pursuit of ambitious social projects on a non-profit basis. The ideology and practices of entrepreneurial philanthropy are seen to have deep roots, originating in the second half of the nineteenth century and encapsulated in Carnegie’s famous essay The Gospel of Wealth (2014 [1889]). Conceived in one age of inequality, the entrepreneurial philanthropy construct remains a vital one today. It led to the first great wave of philanthropic foundations (Carnegie, Rockefeller, Kellogg, and Ford) and underpins the thinking behind the current wave of large scale philanthropic interventions of Gates and others (Bishop & Green, 2008). Entrepreneurial philanthropists bring to their interventions not only money but also their name, networks and business expertise, becoming activists and agents for change (Schervish, 2014). They are characterized by their drive to accumulate personal fortunes, together with a concomitant impulse to employ a share of their wealth in pursuit of philanthropic ventures which they control. Hence, their focus is directed towards the (entrepreneurial) creation of wealth and the (philanthropic) redistribution of that wealth to serve specified social objectives (Acs & Phillips, 2002; Audretsch & Hinger, 2014).

Yet despite growing attention paid to philanthropic giving (Bishop & Green, 2008) and the global reach of the phenomenon, entrepreneurial philanthropy remains under examined (Nicholls, 2010; Taylor, Strom & Renz, 2014), recent exceptions notwithstanding. Harvey, Maclean, Gordon and Shaw (2011), using capital theory to interpret the behavior of Andrew Carnegie, propose a transactional model of entrepreneurial philanthropy, moving the agenda to more critical terrain beyond the realms of altruism and disinterested social behaviour (Boulding, 1962), consonant with the work of Bekkers and Wiepking (2011), Bosworth (2011), Ostrower (1995), Schervish (2005, 2014) and Villadsen (2007). Maclean, Harvey, Gordon and Shaw (2015) take a further theoretical stride in showing how entrepreneurs who have become philanthropists deploy the metaphorical framework of the journey to navigate different social landscapes, and how philanthropic identities have unfolded through a process of wayfinding in response to events, transitions and turning points. Philanthropic identity narratives serve as ‘generativity scripts’ that empower wealthy entrepreneurs to generate a legacy that is both self and socially oriented. This finding is consistent with those of Feldman and Graddy-Reed (2014) who envision the emergence of community minded philanthropists as moving from a concern with business success to social success, as highlighted by social entrepreneurship scholars (Dees & Anderson, 2006; Maclean, Harvey & Gordon, 2013). Other research takes a more critical, pessimistic view of the social processes at work, identifying entrepreneurial philanthropy with the subjugation of democracy and the preservation of privilege on the part of super-rich entrepreneurs as a plutocratic class (Hay, 2016; Kapoor, 2016; Maclean & Harvey, 2016).

Business history, we propose, have much to offer to research on the interrelated topics of entrepreneurship and philanthropy. Friedman and Jones (2011), the current editors of the Business History Review, have argued persuasively that business historians should engage more fully with the defining issues of the moment. In this way, they might speak truth to power by establishing the historical contexts and forces, nationally and internationally, that have informed and continue to inform the present. History affords the opportunity to stand back and identify what has changed and what remains the same in structures and situations, establishing the perspectives necessary for sound policy making (Moody & Breeze, 2016; Reich, Cordelli & Bernholz, 2016). Events that may once have seemed of little consequence often turn out to be decisive, especially those that work subtly to effect far-reaching institutional change (North, 1990; Suddaby, Foster & Mills, 2014). The full effects of the prosecution of the neo-liberal agenda are salient in this regard (Harvey, 2005). Economic historians have already done much to inform the global debate on inequality and its consequences, to which the works of Piketty (2014) and Atkinson (2016) in particular bear elegant testimony. Within the domain of business history, the research of Hall (1992, 2006) and Zunz (2012) are exemplary in demonstrating the linkages between entrepreneurship and philanthropy. Both authors trace the development of philanthropy in the United States in the context of institutional and ideological change, particularly with respect to the formation of large private foundations, laying the groundwork for future work on more specific themes and issues. From a European standpoint, Roza, Vermuelen, Liket and Meijs (2014) point to the need for cross-nationally comparative historical research in highlighting the impact on philanthropic endeavours of different models of civil society and ideologies within different countries.

An essential quality of all papers selected for publication in the Special Issue is deep historical scholarship, exhibiting variously sensitivity to specific historical contexts, historiographical exactitude and skilled analysis of archival and other primary sources. As guest editors, we also urge potential contributors to the Special Issue to demonstrate engagement with appropriate theory and models in addition to excellence in historical research and analysis (Maclean, Harvey & Clegg, 2016a; 2016b; Suddaby, Hardy & Huy, 2011). In this way, we intend that articles selected for publication should speak to as wide an audience as possible inside and outside academia, bringing a real historical perspective to current debates on entrepreneurship and philanthropy and their role, actual and prospective, in the generation and mitigation of the inequalities that have become so entrenched within the world in which we live.
Potential Topics

The following list is indicative of the range of topics contributors might wish to develop, but it is not exhaustive and authors should feel free to put forward research on any topic consistent with the broad theme of the Call for Papers. We particularly welcome historical research that is relevant to contemporary debates, including articles that are comparative across nations. We are looking for historical contributions that make connections between entrepreneurial and philanthropic practices and processes.

  • Historical origins and transitions: the journey into philanthropy.
  • Philanthropic ideas, rewards, satisfactions and motivations.
  • Philanthropic activities, methods, problems, learning and commitments.
  • Social expectations and the choice of philanthropic causes and beneficiaries.
  • The origins and changing discourse of philanthropy.
  • Identity conflict and self-interest in the philanthropic endeavours of entrepreneurs.
  • Founder imprinting and the strategies and transitions of philanthropic foundations.
  • Historical institutionalism, institutional change and philanthropy.
  • Historical actors, philanthropy and the accumulation of social and symbolic capital.
  • Spouses and families in philanthropic decision making.
  • Philanthropy, social innovation and the rise of the non-profit sector.
  • Historical corporate philanthropy and corporate strategy.
  • Entrepreneurial, super-rich and philanthropic networks of the past.
  • Philanthropy, power, elite domination and social control in historical perspective.
  • Distributive justice and the ethics of entrepreneurial philanthropy.

Process, Timeline and Information

The deadline for the submission of papers for consideration for inclusion in the Special Issue is 31st December 2017.

Potential contributors should alert one of the guest editors of their intention to submit an article and seek advice as necessary at the earliest opportunity:

Charles Harvey: charles.harvey@ncl.ac.uk
Mairi Maclean: kmm57@bath.ac.uk
Roy Suddaby: rsuddaby@uvic.ca

A related workshop on Entrepreneur-Philanthropists in Theory and History will take place on the afternoon of 28th June 2017 at the University of Glasgow hosted by the guest editors. This will include a paper development session and there will be opportunities to meet personally with the guest editors.

All articles should be prepared following Business History Review conventions and should not exceed 10,000 words inclusive of footnote references, tables and charts. Submission is by the normal process for the journal clearly signalling that the article is intended for consideration for the Special Issue. The normal Business History Review blind reviewing process will apply.
Final decisions on submissions will be made by the journal editors, Walter Friedman and Geoffrey Jones, following recommendations from the guest editors.

References

Acs, Z.J. and Phillips, R.J. (2002). Entrepreneurship and philanthropy in American capitalism. Small Business Economics, 19: 189-294.
Atkinson, A.B. (2015). Inequality: What can be done? Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Atkinson, A.B., Piketty, T. and Saez, E. (2012). Top Incomes in the Long Run. Institute for Research on Labor and Employment: University of California, Berkeley.
Audretsch, D.B. and Hinger, J.R. (2014). From entrepreneur to philanthropist: Two sides of the same coin? In Taylor, M.L., Strom, R.J. and Renz, D.O. (2014). Handbook of Research on Entrepreneurs’ Engagement with Philanthropy: Perspectives. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar: 24-42.
Baumol, W.J. and Strom, R.J. (2014). Entrepreneurship and philanthropy: Protecting the public interest. In Taylor, M.L., Strom, R.J. and Renz, D.O. (eds) (2014). Handbook of Research on Entrepreneurs’ Engagement with Philanthropy: Perspectives. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar: 11-23.
Beaverstock, J.V. and Hall, S. (2016). Super-rich capitalism: Managing and preserving private wealth management in the offshore world. In Hay, I. & Beaverstock (eds), Handbook on Wealth and the Super-Rich. Cheltenham, Edward Elgar: 401-421.
Bekkers, R. and Wiepking, P. (2011). A literature review of empirical studies of philanthropy: Eight mechanisms that drive charitable giving. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 40(5): 924-973.
Bishop, M. and Green, M. (2008). Philanthrocapitalism. London: Black.
Boltanski, L. & Chiapello, E. (2007). The New Spirit of Capitalism. Trans. G. Elliott. London: Verso.
Bosworth, D. (2011). The cultural contradictions of philanthrocapitalism. Society, 48: 382-388.
Boulding, K. (1962). Notes on a theory of philanthropy. In F.G. Dickinson (Ed.), Philanthropy and public policy. Boston: NBER, 57-72.
Bourguignon, F. (2015). The Globalization of Inequality. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Carnegie, A. (2014). The Autobiography of Andrew Carnegie and His Essay ‘The Gospel of Wealth’. Mineola, NY: Dover Publications.
Dees, J.G. and Anderson, B.B. (2006). Framing a theory of social entrepreneurship. In R. Mosher-Williams (Ed.), Research on social entrepreneurship (pp. 39-66). Indianapolis, IN: ARNOVA.
Feldman, M.P. and Graddy-Reed, A. (2014). Local champions: Entrepreneurs’ transition to philanthropy and the vibrancy of place. In Taylor, M.L., Strom, R.J. and Renz, D.O. (eds) (2014). Handbook of Research on Entrepreneurs’ Engagement with Philanthropy: Perspectives. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar: 43-76.
Friedman, W.A. and Jones, G. (2011). Business history: Time for debate. Business History Review 85(1): 1-8.
Glucksberg, L and Burrows, R. (2016) Family Offices and the Contemporary Infrastructures of Dynastic Wealth’, Sociologica: Italian Journal of Sociology, forthcoming.
Hall, P.D. (1992). Inventing the nonprofit sector and other essays on philanthropy, voluntary and nonprofit organizations. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Hall, P.D. (2006). A historical overview of philanthropy, voluntary associations, and nonprofit organizations in the US, 1600-2000. In Powell, W.W. and Steinberg, R. (2006). The nonprofit sector: A research handbook. 2nd Ed. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press: 32-65.
Harvey, C., Maclean, M., Gordon, J. and Shaw, E. (2011). Andrew Carnegie and the foundations of contemporary entrepreneurial philanthropy. Business History, 53(3): 424-448.
Harvey, D. (2005). A Brief History of Neoliberalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hay, I. and Beaverstock (eds) (2016), Handbook on Wealth and the Super-Rich. Cheltenham, Edward Elgar.
Hay, I. (2016). On plutonomy: Economy, power and the wealthy few in the Second Gilded Age. In Hay, I. & Beaverstock (eds), Handbook on Wealth and the Super-Rich. Cheltenham, Edward Elgar: 68-93.
Kapoor, I. (2016). Billionaire philanthropy: ‘decaf capitalism’. In Hay, I. and Beaverstock (eds) (2016), Handbook on Wealth and the Super-Rich. Cheltenham, Edward Elgar: 113-131.
Maclean, M., Harvey, C. and Gordon, J. (2013). Social innovation, social entrepreneurship and the practice of contemporary entrepreneurial philanthropy. International Small Business Journal, 31(7): 747-763.
Maclean, M., Harvey, C., Gordon, J. and Shaw, E. (2015). Identity, storytelling and the philanthropic journey. Human Relations, 68(10): 1623-1652.
Maclean, M. and Harvey, C. (2016). “Give it Back, George”: Network Dynamics in the Philanthropic Field’. Organization Studies, 37(3): 399-423.
Maclean, M., Harvey, C. and Clegg, S.R. (2016a). Conceptualizing historical organization studies. Academy of Management Review, e-print ahead of publication.
Maclean, M., Harvey, C. and Clegg, S.R. (2016b). Organization theory in business and management history: Present status and future prospects.
Moody, M. and Breeze, B. (eds) (2016). The Philanthropy Reader. Abingdon: Routeledge.
Nicholls, A. (2010). The legitimacy of social entrepreneurship: Reflexive isomorphism in a pre-paradigmatic field. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 34(4): 611-633.
Ostrower, F. (1995). Why the Wealthy Give: the Culture of Elite Philanthropy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Palan, R. and Mangraviti, G, (2016). Troubling tax havens: Multi-jurisdictional arbitrage and corporate tax footprint reduction. In Hay, I. & Beaverstock (eds), Handbook on Wealth and the Super-Rich. Cheltenham, Edward Elgar: 422-441.
Piketty, T. (2014). Capital in the Twenty-first Century. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.
Reich, R. (2015). Saving Capitalism: For Many, Not the Few. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
Reich, R., Cordelli, C. and Bernholz, L. (eds) (2016). Philanthropy in Democratic Societies: History, Institutions, Values. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Roza, L., Vermeulen, M., Liket, K. and Meijs, L. (2014). Contemporary European E2P; Towards an understanding of European philanthrepreneurs. In Taylor, M.L., Strom, R.J. and Renz, D.O. (eds) (2014). Handbook of Research on Entrepreneurs’ Engagement with Philanthropy: Perspectives. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar: 197-233.
Schervish, P.G. (2005). Major donors, major motives: The people and purposes behind major gifts. New Directions for Philanthropic Fundraising, 47, 59-87.
Schervish, P.G. (2014). Hi-tech donors and their impact on philanthropy: The conventional, novel and strategic traits o0f agent-animated wealth and philanthropy. In Taylor, M.L., Strom, R.J. and Renz, D.O. (2014). Handbook of Research on Entrepreneurs’ Engagement with Philanthropy: Perspectives. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar: 148-183.
Schervish, P.G. (2016). Making money and making the self. In Hay, I. and Beaverstock, J.V. (eds), Handbook on Wealth and the Super-Rich. Cheltenham, Edward Elgar: 132-154.
Shaw, E., Gordon, J., Harvey, C. and Maclean, M. (2013). Exploring contemporary entrepreneurial philanthropy. International Small Business Journal, 31(5), 580-599.
Stiglitz, J.E. (2015). The Great Divide. New York: W.W.Norton.
Suddaby, R., Hardy, C. and Huy, Q.N. (2011). Introduction to special topic forum: Where are the new theories of organization? Academy of Management Review, 36(2): 236-246.
Suddaby, R., Foster, W.M. and Mills, A. J. (2014). Historical institutionalism. In M. Bucheli and R.D. Wadhwani (Eds.), Organizations in Time: History, Theory, Method: 100-123. Oxford: OUP.
Taylor, M.L., Strom, R.J. and Renz, D.O. (eds) (2014). Handbook of Research on Entrepreneurs’ Engagement with Philanthropy: Perspectives. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Villadsen, K. (2007). The emergence of ‘neo-philanthropy’. Acta Sociologica, 50: 309-323
Zunz, O. (2012). Philanthropy in America. Princeton, NF: Princeton University Press.

 

 

Business History events in June

The Association of Business Historians Annual Conference 2017

The Human Factor in Business History

Centre for Business History in Scotland

University of Glasgow

29 June – 1 July 2017

The ABH 2017 Conference Programme is now available: http://www.gla.ac.uk/external/ABH/Draft%20Programme%2028.03.17.pdf

 

 

Please note the following workshop just before the conference:

Entrepreneur-Philanthropists in Theory and History

University of Glasgow
28 June 2017, 2.00 pm to 5.00 pm
Room 408F Main Building

The workshop is convened by the guest editors of the forthcoming edition of the Business History Review on Entrepreneurship and Philanthropy edited by Charles Harvey (Newcastle University, UK), Mairi Maclean (University of Bath, UK) and Roy Suddaby (University of Victoria Canada).

The workshop has been timed to take place the afternoon before the annual conference of the Association of Business Historians, which takes place in Glasgow between 29th June and 1st July 2017 and is hosted by the Centre for Business History in Scotland of the University of Glasgow. The conference will be held at the Hilton Grosvenor Hotel and takes as its theme “The Human Factor in Business History.” The workshop is not part of the ABH conference.
The workshop is being held for anyone interested in the topic and especially colleagues intending to make a submission to the forthcoming edition of the Business History Review on Entrepreneurship and Philanthropy. The session is intended as a paper development session in which potential contributors will receive feedback from the guest editors and other participants in the workshop. There will be opportunity following the workshop for 1 to 1 meetings with the editors.

Refreshments will be served in Room 408F, the Business School seminar room, from 1.00 pm. There is no charge for the workshop.

 

CfP: EBHA doctoral summer school

CALL FOR APPLICATIONS

9th EBHA DOCTORAL SUMMER SCHOOL BUSINESS HISTORY: DEBATES, CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES

The 9th edition of the EBHA (European Business History Association) Summer School will take place in Ancona (Italy) from Monday, September 4th to Saturday, September 9th, 2017. The school aims at providing doctoral students with an overview of relevant research results and of innovative tools and methodologies in the field of Business History. It is organised jointly by the European Business History Association (EBHA), the Università Politecnica delle Marche and the Italian Association for Business History (ASSI). Students will be accommodated in the beautiful town of Ancona debating and discussing their research with leading international scholars.

The title of the school will be Business History: Debates, challenges and opportunities. The school will focus on theoretical, methodological and practical issues which are of relevance for advanced research in business history. The main aim of the school is to provide students with a full understanding of the newest trends in research in the field and to provide a friendly atmosphere in which to discuss their preliminary findings with leading scholars as well as among their peers. In this respect, the program features both lectures and seminars given by faculty and student presentations of their research projects. Each student will have 20 minutes maximum to present her/his project, stressing especially: research questions and goals, methodology, sources, challenges and provisional outcomes. After her/his presentation, each student will receive questions and comments from other students and from faculty members (approx 15-20 minutes).

The organisers will cover all local costs (accommodation in a double or triple room and food), but participants are expected to pay their own travel expenses. Participation will be limited to 15-20 PhD students.

Those interested in attending the summer school should send the following documents by e-mail to the academic organiser Dr. Veronica Binda (veronica.binda@unibocconi.it): 1) a brief CV (not exceeding one page); 2) a summary of their dissertation project (not exceeding three pages); 3) (if possible) an example of their work in progress, e.g. a draft chapter or a working paper (in any language).

The deadline for applications is May 14th, 2017. A maximum of 20 participants will be selected from these applications and will be notified by June 4th, 2017.

ERC project “History of EU” (PhDs)

Two 3-year fully funded PhD Scholarships to be held at the University of Glasgow from September 2017

Applications are invited for two 3-year PhD scholarships (with a possibility of a one-year extension) in Economic and Social History at the University of Glasgow.

The successful candidates will be part of the ERC-funded project The Making of a Lopsided Union: Economic Integration in the European Economic Community, 1957-1992 (EURECON) led by Dr Emmanuel Mourlon-Druol. They are expected to begin on 1 September 2017, or as soon as possible thereafter.

Description of the EURECON project

The goal of EURECON is to explore European policymakers’ views about how to make the organisation of the European Economic Community (EEC) fit for the creation of a single currency, from 1957 to 1992. It is often said that the euro has faults of conception. But how did this happen? How was the euro made in such a way that it nearly completely overlooked some critical aspects of monetary unions? The assumption is that in the run-up to the 1992 Maastricht Treaty, European policymakers just did not think properly about how to make the Euro work. Was this really the case? Did European policymakers really overlook the economic foundations of European monetary union?

The project aims to examine European policymakers’ debates and proposals, understand the reasons for their success or failure, identify the dynamics of political and economic trade-offs and compromises, shifting priorities, and alternative approaches that were abandoned at the time but recycled later. The project focuses on five work packages: macroeconomic policy coordination, fiscal transfers, capital market integration, banking harmonisation/supervision and the deepening of the common/single market. The project will examine the origins of the issues that are currently bedevilling the European Union (EU) by investigating the period between the creation of the EEC in 1957 and the decision to create a European single currency in 1992.

PhD positions

The PhD projects will focus on the role and influence of non-state, non-EEC actors and factors in the above discussions. Interested applicants should focus specifically on the role of one of the following actors/factor:

  • Commercial banks: Commercial banks were central actors in the development of European economic integration, in particular with regard to capital market integration, regulation/supervision, and the development of the common/single market. Did they support the creation of a common market in banking? Did they adopt specific lobbying strategies within their respective member states and in Brussels? How did they view the possible future creation of a monetary union in Europe?
  • Big business (other than banks): The implementation of the common/single market, the issue of EEC fiscal transfers, and macroeconomic policy coordination had an impact on the conduct of business in Europe. Did big business consider that these developments would improve their environment, in creating more business opportunities, easier financing and trade? The Roundtable of Industrialists famously lobbied for the Single Market Project; did big business aim to actively support or oppose other developments at different time periods?
  • Trade unions: Macroeconomic policy coordination, EEC fiscal transfers, and the development of the common/single market had an important impact upon labour relations. How did trade unions try to influence European economic policymaking? In particular, how did they promote European social policies and how did they cope with the challenges induced by European economic integration in a globalising world? The rise of unemployment in Europe from the 1970s as well as the reflections mentioned above about the introduction of an EEC-wide unemployment benefit provided an important points of interest for trade unions.
  • The spread and influence of economic ideas on the evolution of European economic cooperation and integration: Many economic ideas have influenced and competed over the development of European economic integration, including German ordo-liberalism, French planning, and neo-liberalism. Recent studies have shed light on the rise of neo-liberal politics in the evolution of thinking about deregulation and the free movement of capital. How did economic thinking evolve in the EEC and how did these influences permeate policymaking at the European level? This topic would more specifically focus on the intellectual history dimension of the economic integration of Europe by looking at one of these schools of thought. How did these ideas spread among European policymakers? How did these ideas change over time? What was their actual influence?

The successful candidate is expected to:

  • Write a PhD thesis under the supervision of Dr Emmanuel Mourlon-Druol
  • Be an active part of the EURECON project and work in close cooperation with other team members
  • Present papers at conferences
  • Publish in international peer-reviewed journals (individual and co-authored)
  • Participate in yearly workshops organised within the scope of EURECON.

The successful candidate will register for a PhD in Economic and Social History, School of Social and Political Sciences, College of Social Sciences, University of Glasgow.

The scholarship covers the successful student’s full-time home/EU tuition fees (£4,121 p.a. for 2016/17), pays a stipend (£14,296 p.a. for 2016/17), and includes a research budget allowance to cover expenses related to archival research and conference attendance (at least £1500 p.a.). There is a possibility for an extension to a fourth year, under the same financial conditions.

PhD students at the University of Glasgow benefit from the College of Social Sciences’ Graduate School Research Training Programme, as well as an annual Thesis Review Committee and an annual Doctoral Retreat. PhD students may also have the opportunity to become Graduate Teaching Assistants and gain teaching experience.

Candidates must be fluent in English. A good command of another European language would be an advantage.

How to apply

Please include the following supporting documentation with your application:

  • Your CV
  • Your research proposal focusing on one of the actors/factors outlined above (max. 2500 words, including footnotes, references and bibliography)
  • Your degree transcripts
  • Your English language certificate
  • Two letters of reference

Interested candidates should apply on the University of Glasgow’s Online Application System http://www.gla.ac.uk/research/opportunities/howtoapplyforaresearchdegree/#/. Applicants should put ‘EURECON’ in the ‘Research Title’ field in ‘Step 6 – Course Details’ of the application form, and select ‘PhD in Economic and Social History (Research)’.

Interested applicants are strongly advised to discuss their research proposal with Dr Emmanuel Mourlon-Druol (emmanuel.mourlon-druol@glasgow.ac.uk) before they apply.

Short-listed candidates may be invited for an interview in Glasgow.

Application deadline is 7 May 2017.

ERC project History of EU (postdocs)

Postdoctoral Research Associate in International Economic History at the University of Glasgow (2 posts)

 Project description

The successful candidates will be part of the ERC-funded project The Making of a Lopsided Union: Economic Integration in the European Economic Community, 1957-1992 (EURECON) led by Dr Emmanuel Mourlon-Druol (See http://e-mourlon-druol.com/eurecon/ for more details). They are expected to begin on 1 September 2017, or as soon as possible thereafter (a few months’ delay is negotiable if need be).

The positions will be for 2 years, starting from September 2017 (or later if so negotiated). In addition to their salary, Post-Doctoral Researchers will receive an allowance for research missions and participation to international conferences of at least £2,500 per year.

 Description of the EURECON project

The goal of EURECON is to explore European policymakers’ views about how to make the organisation of the European Economic Community (EEC) fit for the creation of a single currency, from 1957 to 1992. It is often said that the euro has faults of conception. But how did this happen? How was the euro made in such a way that it nearly completely overlooked some critical aspects of monetary unions? The assumption is that in the run-up to the 1992 Maastricht Treaty, European policymakers just did not think properly about how to make the Euro work. Was this really the case? Did European policymakers really overlook the economic foundations of European monetary union?

The project aims to examine European policymakers’ debates and proposals, understand the reasons for their success or failure, identify the dynamics of political and economic trade-offs and compromises, shifting priorities, and alternative approaches that were abandoned at the time but recycled later. The project focuses on five work packages: macroeconomic policy coordination, fiscal transfers, capital market integration, banking harmonisation/supervision and the deepening of the common/single market. The project will examine the origins of the issues that are currently bedevilling the European Union (EU) by investigating the period between the creation of the EEC in 1957 and the decision to create a European single currency in 1992.

 The Postdoctoral Research Projects will focus on the role and influence of non-state, non-EEC actors and factors in the above discussions.

Postdoctoral Research Projects

Interested applicants should focus specifically on the role of one of the following actors/factor:

  • Commercial banks: Commercial banks were central actors in the development of European economic integration, in particular with regard to capital market integration, regulation/supervision, and the development of the common/single market. Did they support the creation of a common market in banking? Did they adopt specific lobbying strategies within their respective member states and in Brussels? How did they view the possible future creation of a monetary union in Europe?
  • Big business (other than banks): The implementation of the common/single market, the issue of EEC fiscal transfers, and macroeconomic policy coordination had an impact on the conduct of business in Europe. Did big business consider that these developments would improve their environment, in creating more business opportunities, easier financing and trade? The Roundtable of Industrialists famously lobbied for the Single Market Project; did big business aim to actively support or oppose other developments at different time periods?
  • Trade unions: Macroeconomic policy coordination, EEC fiscal transfers, and the development of the common/single market had an important impact upon labour relations. How did trade unions try to influence European economic policymaking? In particular, how did they promote European social policies and how did they cope with the challenges induced by European economic integration in a globalising world? The rise of unemployment in Europe from the 1970s as well as the reflections mentioned above about the introduction of an EEC-wide unemployment benefit provided an important points of interest for trade unions.
  • The spread and influence of economic ideas on the evolution of European economic cooperation and integration: Many economic ideas have influenced and competed over the development of European economic integration, including German ordo-liberalism, French planning, and neo-liberalism. Recent studies have shed light on the rise of neo-liberal politics in the evolution of thinking about deregulation and the free movement of capital. How did economic thinking evolve in the EEC and how did these influences permeate policymaking at the European level? This topic would more specifically focus on the intellectual history dimension of the economic integration of Europe by looking at one of these schools of thought. How did these ideas spread among European policymakers? How did these ideas change over time? What was their actual influence?

 The successful candidate is expected to:

  • Engage in independent scientific research that will result in high-quality publications in international peer-reviewed journals (individual and co-authored)
  • Be an active part of the EURECON project and work in close cooperation with other team members
  • Provide some organisational and administrative support, in collaboration with other team members, to the research activities of the EURECON project
  • Present papers at conferences
  • Participate in yearly workshops organised within the scope of EURECON.

 To apply for the position, applicants are required to submit (www.glasgow.ac.uk/jobs, Job Ref 016726):

  • Their CV,
  • The details of three referees
  • A cover letter explaining how their research experience fits the EURECON project,
  • A one to two-page description of the research they would like to undertake during their tenure, clearly mentioning: the scope of their project, the state of the literature, and the archival sources they would like to use.

 

Please upload your cover letter and one to two-page research document as ONE document.

Candidates must be fluent in English. A good command of another European language would be an advantage.

Candidates should have a PhD in History (or related discipline), or be close to completion.

Short-listed candidates will be invited for an interview to present their research proposal. It is anticipated that the interviews for these positions will take place in May/June 2017.

Interest applicants may contact Dr Emmanuel Mourlon-Druol (Emmanuel.Mourlon-Druol@glasgow.ac.uk) for informal enquiries.

Managing Communist Enterprise

Managing Communist Enterprise: Poland, Hungary and Czechoslovakia, 1945-1970

czech.jpg

A Symposium

 

Rutgers University, Camden

April 21st 2017

12pm – 2pm, Faculty Lounge

with

Philip Scranton (Rutgers, Camden)

and

Pal Germuska (EUI – Florence)

Natalya Vinokurova (Wharton)

Lee Vinsel (Stevens Institute of Technology)

 

The business history of communist eastern and central Europe has not yet received the attention that it deserves. This symposium is organized around a significant new paper by Phil Scranton, entitled “Managing Communist Enterprise: Poland, Hungary and Czechoslovakia, 1945-1970,” that itself emerges from a major project being undertaken by Professor Scranton and Professor Patrick Fridenson to examine the evolution of global business practices in the second half of the twentieth-century.  Based in extensive research in previously unused archives and sources, the paper uncovers the fascinating and often surprising story of management in three key European economies, essentially opening up a hitherto neglected field of study in business history.

Professor Scranton will briefly present the paper before we hear three invited commentaries, from Pal Germuska (EUI), Natalya Vinokurova (Wharton), and Lee Vinsel (Stevens Institute of Technology). Following a response from Professor Scranton, the final hour of event will be reserved for audience discussion. The lead paper and all three commentaries will subsequently be published in Enterprise and Society: The International Journal of Business History. 

Everyone intending to attend is strongly encouraged to download and read the lead paper in advance. Please note that in order to access the PDF of this unpublished paper, you will first need to log in with your BHC website credentials.

All are welcome. The event is free and registration is not required, though it would be appreciated if notices of intent to attend could be sent to Andrew Popp at andrew.popp@liverpool.ac.uk. All enquiries should be addressed to the same address.

We gratefully acknowledge the support of Rutgers University, Camden and of the Business History Conference.

http://www.thebhc.org/managing-communist-enterprise-rutgers-camden-21-april-2017-0