Showing papers by "Matthias Kipping published in 2014"

History in Organization and Management Theory: More Than Meets the Eye

Abstract: There has been a growing debate about the role of history in management research with several authors making suggestions on how to bring the two (back) together and others even highlighting the need for a “historic turn”. What we argue in this paper is that, while history was indeed sidelined by the scientization of management since the late 1950s, it started to make a comeback from the 1980s onwards and is increasingly employed in a number of research programs. We stress that the crucial question for management scholars engaging with history (or wanting to do so) is how it relates to theory. First of all, we present a systematic overview of the way history has been used—both at the micro (organizational) and macro-levels of analysis—distinguishing between what we refer to as “history to theory” and “history in theory”. In the former, we consider those research programs, such as (neo-)institutionalism, where history serves as evidence to develop, modify or test theories. In the case of “history in theory” we identify research programs where history or the past are part of the theoretical model itself as a driver or moderator, with “imprinting” as a prime example. Second, we also identify a growing number of studies that go further by displaying what we call “historical cognizance” in the sense of incorporating period effects or historical contingencies into their theorizing efforts. Finally, drawing on our broad overview, we make more specific suggestions for increasing the visibility and influence of history in organization and management theory.

The managerialization of banking: from blueprint to reality

Abstract: This paper shows how banks in the USA and Western Europe became more managerial during the late 1960s and 1970s, due to the adoption of a multidivisional organizational structure, originally pioneered by industrial enterprises in the 1920s. This meant the introduction of a more elaborate hierarchy with more autonomy as well as accountability for all levels, including the branches, which were supposed to generate profits through more ‘aggressive’ marketing and selling, while the center exercised control through explicit management tools, including budgeting and planning. As this paper also shows, these changes were actively promoted by consultancies, and in particular McKinsey, which had developed a blueprint of a ‘modern’ banking organization that it subsequently implemented in a large number of banks – a process that this paper illustrates through an in-depth case study of the Dutch Amsterdam-Rotterdam (AMRO) bank. More generally, insights from this paper query an established timeline that links the more aggressive, even reckless behavior of banks with deregulation since the 1980s and also casts some doubt on the notion – often sustained by consultants – that management ideas and practices can easily be transferred from one sector to another.