Search results

Schmoller tried to combine reasoning and economic analysis to give a new foundation to German economic theory in the nineteenth century. Opposing the economic philosophy of Fichte, Schmoller preferred an institutional approach to the extremes of pure market and pure state economy. His ideas on economic welfare as a collective rather than as an individualistic idea are discussed.

Analysing the values theories of the nineteenth century, there is a remarkable difference between German and English theories: the idea of subjective value is a very German idea, from the beginning of the nineteenth century, ignored by textbooks of the history of economic thought. The German conception of subjective value is subjective, but not individualistic, and is different from the marginalistic conception of value later on. In the German tradition ‐ Hufeland, Lotz, Rau, Hermann, Knies, Wagner, etc. ‐ the value theory deals with “meaning”. The economic actor is able to choose subjectively, but in the context of a collective meaning. We get some new insights into the very German idea of a social economy.

Gender equality plans (GEPs) are currently the preferred approach to initiate structural change towards gender equality in research organisations. In order to achieve structural change, GEPs have to be more than just a formally adopted institutional policy. Effective GEPs lead to a transformation of gendered practices and thus to structural change. This chapter presents the innovative approach developed for an H2020 structural change project and its theoretical background. We argue that due to the dual logic, which characterises academic organisations, the organisational logic and the academic logic, change is a complex endeavour. To deal with this complexity, one of the main functions of a GEP is to provide space and initiate reflexivity at an individual as well as at an institutional level. A theory of change approach supports reflexivity in all stages of a GEP as it ensures that basic assumptions of the institutional change process are questioned and reflected on by the different stakeholder groups involved in the implementation.

Women have conquered the universities but their way into top positions is still stopped by a class ceiling. Focusing appointment procedures for full professors the chapter examines why policies aiming at gendered practices have only shown moderate success.

The analysis follows a praxeological approach and draws on material derived from case studies covering all 22 universities in Austria. The aim of these case studies was to analyze the implementation of a new legal framework for appointment procedures at Austrian universities.

In this chapter, the effects of specific measures to tackle gender bias in appointment procedures for full professors in the Austrian context are analyzed. It is evident that despite gender awareness and a comprehensive set of regulations, regularly traditional practices remain stable and unreflected with regard to an inherent gender bias. The analysis presented thus reveals the limitations of existing equality policies. We can assume that reflexivity is a precondition for a change of unreflected practices, but does not form a part of existing policies.

We conclude that policies aimed at changing gendered practices have to (1) built up gender awareness as well as gender competence and (2) encourage reflexivity as well as agency among all stakeholders involved in a practice. Although there are cases where reflexivity arises from an individual conviction with regard to equality, most stakeholders have to be convinced – or even forced – by a superior authority to change their practices. Such a change can be forced by legal obligation or set down as a clear requirement by university management. It becomes evident that any guideline or regulation addressing gendered practices have to be accompanied by features that create room for reflection and reflexivity.

This chapter explores the origins of the theme of competitive advantage in 19th and early 20th century economics. This theme, which forms the core of modern Strategic Management, was a battleground for debates about the value of abstract theory versus observations about real-life events. Intellectual genealogies, citations, and other sources show the central roles played by the University of Vienna and Harvard University. These two institutions strongly influenced the theory of monopolistic competition as well as all three modern views of competitive advantage – the industrial as expressed by Porter, the resource-based as expressed by Penrose, and the evolutionary as expressed by Schumpeter.