Reconstructing the B-School

Reblogged from NEP-HIS:

Mitch Larson very kindly reviewed our article in Business History: “Clio in the Business School: Historical Approaches in Strategy, International Business and Entrepreneurship”, which the publishers have made available for free for a time: Business History, 59(6): 904-27

Review by Mitchell J. Larson (University of Central Lancashire)

Recently Martin Parker (Bristol) has taken to the airwaves promoting the idea of bulldozing the business school. In sharp contrast, Andrew Perchard, Niall MacKenzie, Stephanie Decker, and Giovanni Favero make a compelling case for certain disciplines in the management sciences to open themselves to alternative methodological and epistemological approaches. They argue that the fields of strategy, international business, and entrepreneurship have not embraced historically-oriented research to the same extent as other fields within business and management studies. The authors also admit that many scholars conducting historical business research have not made a sufficiently solid case about the robustness of their historical methodology(s) or data to convince other social scientists about the validity of their claims. Drawing upon an impressive range of previous works to develop their discussion, the paper attempts to reconcile these discrepancies to highlight how a more explicit articulation of the historian’s process could overcome the concerns of ‘mainstream’ management scholars regarding theorization and methodology in these three fields specifically and in management studies generally.

To continue reading, click here: https://nephist.wordpress.com/2018/07/24/reconstructing-the-b-school/

 

Advertisements

Video: A new history of management

Have a look at this video summary of the new book A new history of management, by Stephen Cummings, Victoria University of Wellington; Todd Bridgman, Victoria University of Wellington; John Hassard, University of Manchester; Michael Rowlinson, University of Exeter.

Read more at http://www.cambridge.org/us/academic/subjects/management/organisation-studies/new-history-management#AR8fSzRrR3hWUYRv.99

Or: www.cambridge.org/historyofmanagement

 

 

 

 

 

BAM event: Management History and Strategy in Conversation

Book Your Place NowJoint SIG Event: Management History and Strategy In Conversation – Can Movements Inform Responsibility?

The BAM Management and Business History and the BAM Strategy SIG are delighted to announce that joint SIG event, Management History and Strategy In Conversation – Can Movements Inform Responsibility? is taking place on Thursday 1st March 2018, at Newcastle Business School, Northumbria University from 13.00 – 16.30.

There is continued and increasing academic interest in corporate responsibility and how this interacts and informs strategic management. On the one hand, contemporary movements such as the UN Global Compact sustainable development goals, as well as initiatives such as B-corporation accreditation have gained increasing attention, and yet what strategizing managers can learn from historical movements has received less attention. This seminar seeks to redress this balance. We bring together academics with expertise in the management history of movements such as the cooperative movement, credit unions, the mutuality movement, how Quakers as a religious movement left their mark, and we explore a case study of how Taylor’s scientific management was enacted in a ‘responsible’ business context.

The aim is to bring together researchers and doctoral students from academic and management contexts. We will outline the latest research being conducted in historical movements and discuss what lessons can be learned by contemporary organisations.

The benefits of such an event include increasing awareness of the types and foci of research in this community, to look for synergies in research streams such as strategy, responsible business, management history, and law, etc, and to find ways of collaborating that build bridges between different disciplines. We hope that participants will influence this discussion and the directions in which research could travel.

Who Should Attend

This event is aimed at researchers and doctoral students who are interested in how academic research interests can be aligned and who wish to collaborate across different fields.

Speakers

  • Prof John Wilson – Northumbria University
  • Sallyanne Decker – Greenwich University
  • Mark Billings – Exeter University
  • John Quail – York University
  • Nicholas Burton – Northumbria University

Event Fee 

  • BAM Student members: FREE
  • BAM members: FREE
  • Non-BAM members: £20

Date: Thursday 1st March
Time: 13.00 – 16.30
Location: City Campus East Lecture Theatre 002, Newcastle Business School, Northumbria University, Newcastle, NE1 8ST

Contact

For specific information about this event please contact the workshop facilitator(s):

Dr Nicholas Burton – n.burton@northumbria.ac.uk 

For general enquiries please contact the BAM Office on +44(0)2073837770, or at bam@bam.ac.uk

Rowntree Lectures

The Rowntree Lectures and the British Interwar Management Movement

Workshop, 18 January 2018

The Research Team (from the University of Exeter and the School of Management at the University of Bath) are running a Research Workshop on 18 January 2018 at The University of Bath’s Building, 83 Pall Mall, St. James’, London SW1Y 5ES. The morning session is designed to develop skills in being more effective in archives, discussing (and demonstrating) data capture and Optical Character Recognition software. We expect participants to undertake a small-scale OCR project. The team will be joined by Dr Mike Anson, Archive Manager at the Bank of England Archive, who will discuss the Bank Archive’s recent experiments with automated transcription software. This practical session continues methods of retrieving that material in writing up research. In the afternoon session, Professors Alan Booth, Gareth Shaw and Mairi Maclean will present interim findings and conclusions on the Rowntree Lectures and the interwar management movement.

Programme

10 am                  Workshop opens

10.15                   Brief Introduction and Welcome: Alan Booth

10.30                   Practical Skills in the Archive: Alan Booth, Rachel Pistol and Mike Anson

This session will involve the use of a digital camera in the archive and the use of OCR software to process those images. We intend to create an OCR exercise for participants

11.45                   Databases and other forms of information retrieval: Alan Booth, Rachel Pistol

The session will demonstrate an Access database designed for the individual scholar and a more ambitious project suited to bigger research teams.

12.30                   Lunch

1.30                     Preliminary Findings

Gareth Shaw, ‘An Introduction to the Rowntree Papers as a Research Resource’

Alan Booth, ‘The cliff edge: British Industry and the pervading sense of crisis after the First World War’

Mairi Maclean, ‘Management Learning and the Rowntree material’.

4.00                     Workshop closes

For further details, please contact Professor Alan Booth at a.e.booth@exeter.ac.uk

A New History of Management

We are very pleased to announce that a new publication on the history of management is out now:

A New History of Management

 

Existing narratives about how we should organize are built upon, and reinforce, a concept of ‘good management’ derived from what is assumed to be a fundamental need to increase efficiency. But this assumption is based on a presentist, monocultural, and generally limited view of management’s past. A New History of Management disputes these foundations. By reassessing conventional perspectives on past management theories and providing a new critical outline of present-day management, it highlights alternative conceptions of ‘good management’ focused on ethical aims, sustainability, and alternative views of good practice. From this new historical perspective, existing assumptions can be countered and simplistic views disputed, offering a platform from which graduate students, researchers and reflective practitioners can develop alternative approaches for managing and organizing in the twenty-first century.

GoogleBooks

ResearchGate

CfP: MHRG annual workshop

Call for Papers: Management History Research Group annual workshop

The 2017 Management History Research Group’s workshop will be held at the People’s History Museum, Manchester on July 10th and 11th.

The full call for papers is displayed on the MHRG webpages:

http://mgt-hist.org/index.php/2017/02/26/call-for-papers-mhrg-annual-workshop-2017-peoples-history-museum-manchester-july-10-11/

Further info about the workshop, e.g. registration fees and process, will be displayed there in due course.

We look forward to receiving your abstracts and/or suggestions for panels. The deadline for the receipt of abstracts is May 5th. Please send any abstracts to this dedicated email address below:

mhrg.manchester@gmail.com

Kind regards

Prof Leo McCann (on behalf of the workshop organizing committee).

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

Resource on management history

I have just come across this new YouTube channel (thanks to Scott Taylor) about the History of Management.

New History of Management channel is a repository for videos that look at the history of management in new and interesting ways in order to encourage thinking differently about management and management education today. It is named after the book A New History of Management, written by Stephen Cummings, Todd Bridgman, John Hassard & Michael Rowlinson, which will be published by Cambridge University Press later in 2017.

 

CfP: Use of Methodology in MH

Special issue call for papers from Journal of Management History

USES OF METHODOLOGY IN MANAGEMENT HISTORY

Guest Editors:
Wim van Lent, Montpellier Business School
Gabrielle Durepos, Mount Saint Vincent University

Submission deadline: 1 February 2018

Background

Ever since the “historical turn” in organisation studies (Clark and Rowlinson 2004), the importance of history to understanding organisations and institutions has been increasingly recognized (e.g. Sydow, Schreyogg and Koch 2009, Ocasio, Mauskapf and Steele 2015, Suddaby 2016, Durepos and Mills 2012). Since history provides an alternative to the dominant science paradigms in organisation studies (Zald 1993), studies using a historical approach are contributing to and even shaping a growing number of scholarly debates (Decker, Kipping and Wadhwani 2015). The growing appreciation of historical approaches to building and testing organisation theory has spawned a body of work on how to engage in historical analysis with the specific aim of bridging the gap between the historical and organisational scientific communities (e.g. Rowlinson, Hassard and Decker 2014, De Jong, Higgins and Van Driel 2015, Whittle and Wilson 2015, Suddaby 2016, Durepos 2015). The fundamental insight that emerges from it is that history is no less fragmented than organisational theory (Rowlinson et al. 2014: 269). According to Bowden (2016), management scholars are essentially divided along a continuum with on the one extreme De Jong et al.’s (2015) position that history should be empirical and theory-oriented, and on the other extreme Whittle and Wilson’s (2015) “ethnomethodological” perspective, which is rooted in postmodernism and takes a more critical perspective on history-writing. Scholars find themselves either on the continuum with genealogy (Decker et al. 2015) and rhetorical history (Suddaby, Foster and Quinn Trank 2010) and even beyond with ANTi-History (Durepos and Mills 2012, 2017).
Although methodological diversity could impede moving the field forward, the variety that they encompass comes with potential, for example in terms of diversity of research questions and richness of historical knowledge (Decker et al. 2015). Fortunately, the conditions for the further development of management history (also in relation to other fields) seem to be in place: despite history’s growing permeation of organisation studies, there is still a lot of evidence enclosed in corporate archives with which management historians can formulate novel insights into the working of organisations and institutions (Rowlinson et al. 2014, Mills and Helms Mills 2017). However, in order to fully realize this potential, management history will have to go beyond “merely” continuing the proliferation of research using alternative types of historical data and analysis. Most importantly, research should be multidisciplinary (Bucheli and Wadhwani 2014), connecting an understanding of organisational theory and methods with historical contexts and source material (Rowlinson et al. 2014), or involving multiple sources and methods for data analysis (Bowden 2016). In addition, since histories are not uncontested records, management history is greatly helped by methodological reflexivity (Rowlinson et al. 2014). That is, when researchers are aware of their role in selecting certain traces over others, what their sources cover, and how and why they were put together, as well as the shaping influence of the historical context within which they construct theoretical arguments, they may improve the plausibility of their analyses and better identify scope conditions (Bowden 2016).

Aims and Scope
This special issue has two broad purposes: 1) to move forward the methodological debates in management history and 2) to demonstrate the use of / refine historical methods in organisational research through empirical analysis. We therefore welcome both theoretical and empirical papers. Below we suggest a non-exhaustive list of specific topics that contribute to the above two goals. Papers focusing on topics that are not included but sufficiently related to the goals highlighted above would also be welcome as submissions to the special issue.
•    Epistemology and management history
•    Typification of research methodologies
•    Novel research methods in management history
•    Ways in which different methods can be combined for richer empirical insights
•    Empirical demonstrations of the use of one or several methodologies
•    Methodological refinement through empirical analysis
•    Benefits / drawbacks of research methods for a management history audience

Submission Process
Submitted papers must conform to the submission guidelines of the Journal of Management History. Manuscripts are due by 1 February 2018 and must be submitted using the JMH submission system at https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/jmh. Authors should indicate that they would like their document to be considered for the special issue “Uses of Methodology in Management History”. Authors of papers invited to be revised and resubmitted will be expected to work within a tight timeframe for revisions.

Further information

Questions pertaining to this special issue may be directed to:
•    Wim van Lent (w.vanlent@montpellier-bs.com)
•    Gabrielle Durepos (gabrielle.durepos@msvu.ca)
•    Bradley Bowden (b.bowden@griffith.edu.au)

For questions about submitting to the special issue contact the JMH Publisher, Patti Davis (pdavis@emeraldinsight.com).

References

Bowden, B (2016) Editorial and note on the writing of management history. Journal of Management History, Vol. 22, No. 2, pp. 118-129.
Bucheli M and Wadhwani D (2014) Organizations in time: history, theory, methods. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Clark P and Rowlinson M (2004) The treatment of history in organisation studies: toward an “historic turn”? Business History, Vol. 46, No. 3, pp. 331-352.
De Jong A, Higgins DM and Van Driel H (2015) Towards a new business history? Business History, Vol. 57, No. 1, pp. 5-29.
Decker S, Kipping M and Wadhwani D (2015) New business histories! Plurality in business history research methods. Business History, Vol. 57, No.1, pp. 30-40.
Durepos G (2015) ANTi-history: Toward amodern histories, in P Genoe McLaren, AJ Mills and T Weatherbee (Eds.), The Routledge companion to management and organisational history (pp. 153-180). New York: Routledge.
Durepos G and Mills A (2012) ANTi-history: Theorizing the past, history, and
historiography in management and organizational studies. Charlotte, NC:
Information Age Publishing.
Durepos G and Mills A (In press, 2017) ANTi-history: An alternative approach to historiography, in C Cassell, A Cunliffe and G Grandy (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative business and management research methods. London: Sage.
Mills A and Helms Mills J (In press, 2017) Archival research, in C Cassell, A Cunliffe and G Grandy (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative business and management research methods. London: SAGE.
Ocasio W, Mauskapf M and Steele CWJ (2016) History, society, and institutions: the role of collective memory in the emergence and evolution of societal logics, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 41, No. 4, pp. 676-699.
Rowlinson M, Hassard J and Decker S (2014) Research strategies for organisational history: a dialogue between historical theory and organization theory, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 39, No. 3, pp. 250-274.
Suddaby R (2016) Toward a historical consciousness: following the historic turn in management thought, M@n@gement, Vol. 19, No. 1, pp. 46-60.
Suddaby R, Foster W and Quinn Trank C (2010) Rhetorical history as a source of competitive advantage, Advances in Strategic Management, Vol. 27, pp. 147-173.
Sydow J, Schreyögg G and Koch J (2009) Organisational path dependence: opening the black box, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 34, No. 4, pp. 689-709.
Whittle A and Wilson J (2015) Ethnomethodology and the production of history: studying ‘history-in-action’, Business History, Vol. 57, No. 1, pp. 41-63.
Zald M (1993) Organisation studies as a scientific and humanistic enterprise: towards a reconceptualization of the foundations of the field, Organisation Science, Vol. 4, No. 4, pp. 513-528.