Search results

The purpose of this paper is to explore issues related to a recent article by Bradley Bowden published in QROM titled “Empiricism, and modern postmodernism: a critique”. The argument presented here is that antagonism between different sub-communities undertaking work related to the “historic-turn” in management and organization studies (MOS) should give way to greater acceptance of different “phenomenal” concerns and different methods of research.

This paper is based on a critical reading and interpretation of relevant texts. This paper critiques recent work by Bradley Bowden. These are then used as a starting point for a discussion of the different ways in which historical research is practiced in MOS.

The central interpretation developed is that despite many strengths, there are both interpretative and argumentational limitations to Bowden’s criticism that the historic-turn in MOS is postmodernist in nature. In pointing to the varieties of historical research and interpretation in the field, this paper calls for greater and more sympathetic understanding between the different related sub-fields that are interested in history in relation to management and organization.

This paper concludes by calling for more historical work that deals with historiographical and theoretical issues, rather than a continuation of methodological debates that focus on antagonisms between different methods of undertaking historical research to the exclusion of advancing the creation of new historical knowledge, however constructed.

This paper articulates a pluralistic and ecumenical vision for historical research in relation to management and organization. The primary contribution is therefore to attempt to dissolve the seeming assumption of dialectical antagonism between different but related sub-communities of practice.

This study aims to offer a postcolonial approach that goes past current management history controversies.

Discussion of current management history controversies with examples.

Post-colonial approaches to management history enable engagement with questions of power and knowledge in the management discipline.

Further historical research is needed that considers the interplay of disciplinary knowledge and the historical events under question, especially in post-colonial settings.

It is essential to engage with historical texts and interpretations to better understand the contextual limitations to management as a discipline: a better understanding of disciplinary pasts enables us to better understand the present.

By considering management’s pasts, this paper can acknowledge more closely how the discipline continues to retain colonialist assumptions that need to be challenged and changed.

Examples of management history from formerly colonized regions.

Much research has focused on the reasons for child labor. This paper, in examining the experiences of late nineteenth century Australia seeks to ask the alternate research question: “What are the factors that cause managers to desist from the use of child labor during periods of initial industrialization, even where the society is characterized by a youthful demography and low levels of manufacturing productivity?”.

This study measures the incidence of child labor in Queensland, Australia's third largest state, through an examination of the censuses for 1891 and 1901. It then locates the results of this analysis in the nineteenth century Australian peculiar pattern of economic investment.

It is found that industrializing Australia had an extremely low incidence of child labor. This is attributed to the highly capitalized nature of the Australian rural and mining sectors, and the linkages between these sectors and the wider economy. This suggests that counties, or regions, with a highly commercialized primary sector, and with manufacturing establishments with high skill requirements (even if characterized by low productivity), will have a low incidence of child labor.

The most effective policy for reducing the incidence of child labor is to enhance capital investment in the primary sector and enhance the need for workplace skills in the secondary sector.

The International Labor Organisation suggests that there is currently a revival in child labor. This paper suggests that the most effective policies for reducing the incidence of child labor are ones that seek to foster increased levels of capital investment in the primary sector, rather than ones directed towards legal restriction or poverty alleviation.

This paper aims to find common ground between the supposed incompatible meta-historical positioning of positivism and post-positivism through a turn to mnemohistory in management and organizational history.

Drawing on the idea of creative synthesis and positioning theory, the authors interject concepts from cultural memory studies in historical research on business and organizations to encourage management historians and organization theorists interested in joining the dialogue around how the past is known in the present. Using notions of “aftermath” and “events,” the idea of apositivism is written into historical organization studies to focus on understanding the complex ways of how past events translate into history. The critical historic turn event is raised as an exemplar of these ideas.

The overview of the emergence of the controversial historic turn in management and organization studies and the positioning of its adherents and antagonists revealed that there may be some commonality between the fragmented sense of the field. It was revealed that effective history vis-à-vis mnemohistory may hold the potential of a shared scholarly ethic.

The research builds on recent work that has sought to bring together the boundaries of management and organizational history. This paper explains how mnemohistory can offer a common position that is instrumental for theorizing the relationships among the past-infused constructs such as organizational heritage, legacy and identity.

The development of the Pacific seaborne coal trade since 1960 has been central to East Asia's economic expansion. In exploring the growth of this trade this paper seeks to understand why Japanese steel mills (JSMs), the world's largest coal importers, used few of the strategies that one would expect in the light of resource dependency theory, relying instead on market exchanges.

This study relies primarily on archival sources, held by the Departments of Mines and Natural Resources in Victoria (British Columbia) and Brisbane (Australia) to reconstruct changing patterns of supply and price in the Pacific coal trade.

It is found that by relying on a strategy that amounted to “vertical quasi‐integration” JSMs were able to use their combined power to dictate the terms of market exchanges with buyers during the 1980 and 1990s. By 2000, however, this strategy had become counter‐productive, as low prices fostered the emergence of a powerful Australian‐based selling oligopoly.

The study contributes towards the growing study of transnational events, experiences and institutions in management history, filling a noticeable gap in resource dependency theory, which has not previously explored the long‐term consequences of strategies aimed at reducing dependency.

East Asia has become the major engine for world economic growth and manufacturing output since the 1970s, and this study explores for the first time the genesis and development of the Pacific coal trade that has underpinned this growth.

The study demonstrates the long‐term adverse consequences of attempts to manipulate buyer‐supplier relationships to minimise cost inputs. By creating a low‐cost environment, coal buyers ensured the emergence of a sellers' cartel that eventually forced up world coal prices to the detriment of consumers.

No previous study has attempted a study of a major international commodity trade over such an extensive timeframe. It is likely that similar attempts to manipulate supply and price in other commodity trades will, over time, result in similar outcomes.

The purpose of this study is to investigate the convergence and divergence aspects of the Russian modernisation experience of c.1450–c.1600 and its role in both Russian history and management history.

This study combines in-depth data collection from multiple sources such as Russian Chronicles, eyewitness accounts (mostly by foreigners) and papers in history and management. The applied methodology also includes an examination of Ivan III’s modernisation initiative and its implementation in c.1450–c.1600. The analysis is conducted with an eye to understanding the extent to which Russian experiences converged or diverged from those found in Western Europe.

Russian modernisation is usually associated with Peter the Great. Early initiatives, such as those that occurred in Russia between 1462 (the ascent of Ivan III) and 1606 (the Time of Troubles) are overlooked. This paper, however, argues that without these earlier modernisation efforts Russia would not have survived as a country. Given the central role that Russia has played in European and world history, and understanding of this period is key to comprehending the modern world and global systems of management.

This paper seeks to understand a decisive period in Russian history and Russian management, highlighting the extent to which Russian experiences both diverged and converged with those found in Western Europe.

The paper helps us to understand both the successes and problems of Russian management since the 15th century.

To the best of author’s knowledge, this study is the first to consider Russian modernisation during the period c.1400–c.1600 with an eye to current debates in convergence/divergence theory.

Management history has long acknowledged the existence of unproductive labour. Despite becoming unfashionable in modern times, the growth of unproductive labour within the economic composition of Australia’s labour force, witnessed since the late 1980s, brings to the fore old debates with a modern resonance, debates as to how and when labour contributes to economic growth. Using Australia as a case study, this paper aims to explore the economic cost increasing rates of unproductive labour, typically associated with government-imposed regulation, may have upon an organisation, and more broadly society.

This paper explores the theoretical frameworks developed by classical and neoclassical economists on the subject of productive and unproductive labour and uses key elements to explain the economic consequences of the current labour economy and regulatory environment that exists within modern Australia.

It is the growth of unproductive roles within the Australian economy since the late 1980s that contributes not only to the rising cost of employing domestically and the rising cost of living, but furthermore, to the fragility of Australia’s long-term economic security.

Australia’s economy is bound by chains of regulation. No longer does productivity fuel a growing economy, but rather, economies are powered by the rein of unproductive labour – labour that does not produce value but rather, consumes it. Unproductive labour is not a “dusty museum piece”. Rather, it is a defining characteristic of modern Australia, one that impacts immensely the cost of domestic business, and ultimately, society and the cost of living.

By engaging with recent debates between management historians over social constructionism, this paper aims to show the merits of adopting a new realist ontology of the business enterprise. In contrast with ANTi-History, the purpose is to provide a philosophically rigorous conception of social objects and to argue that enterprises are a member of this category.

Insights from Maurizio Ferraris’s documentality theory and Graham Harman’s philosophy of social objects are used to identify the ontological forming ground and developmental pathway of an Antipodean stevedoring company that operated prior to the deregulation of New Zealand’s ports in 1989.

With regard to social entities in general and firms in particular, continental philosophy’s resurgent realist movement provides a history-aware social ontology that incorporates the grain of truth lying within social constructionism. As exemplified by the writings of Ferraris and Harman, realism provides a viable conception of social objects and, in so doing, a more coherent ontological foundation for the business enterprise than the relational ontology embraced by management history ANTians.

By drawing on two realist perspectives hitherto neglected by management historians, this paper resolves disagreements about the ontology of the business enterprise.