York u

The Past, History, and Historiography in Management and Organizational

Studies

Albert J. MillsSobey School of BusinessSaint Mary’s University

Five Trends in Canadian Research

Tracking (Mintzberg & Rose, 2003; see also Arnold & Brown 1986; Austin & Mintzberg 1996)

Longitudinal study (Delios & Ensign, 2000), Evolutionary analysis (Baum, Rowley, & Shipilov,

2004; see also Korkie & Turtle 1998). Junctures (Mills & Helms Mills, 2006). Historical analysis (McQuarrie, 2005; Sexty, 2000;

2008; see also Arnold & Brown 1986; Austin 1998; Jones 1992; and Sharma & Steier 1990).

Some elementary definitions

The `past’ is generally viewed as that which has gone before (e.g., the work of Frederick Taylor).

history (small `h’) is often viewed as study of the past (e.g., discussion of contribution of Taylor to management theory).

History (large `H’) is generally viewed as the discipline which studies history (e.g., a detailed and coherent study of the life and times of Taylor that conforms to recognizable rules of the discipline).

Historiography: the method of historical study (e.g., what are the methodological issues and challenges of studying the past

Why History? (Keiser)

Kieser (1994) argues that despite the earlier importance of history to organization studies it has now “become extremely rare” for organizational researchers to draw on historical analysis (p.609).


1. In order to understand contemporary institutions it important to know something of their historical development (p.609)

see Hofstede (1980, 1991) who found that `cultural differences between organizational structures reflect difference in value systems’ rooted in historical development

See Khurana, 2007 on `the modern manager’ and the development of the business school)


2. Through historical analysis we can reduce the ideological biases that are embedded in “current `fashionable’ trends in organization theory and practice” (p.610)

see Keiser (1997) or mgmt fads and fashion See Mills et al, 2002 on leadership studies –

Lewin Lippett, White 1939 Vs. Lippett & White, 1950s).


3. Through historical analyses we can “interpret existing organizational structures not as determined by [objective] laws but as the result of decisions in past choice opportunities,” whether intentional or implicit (p.611)

see Arndt and Bigelow (2005) on hospital administration: Mintzberg et al (1986) on strategy).


4. “By confronting theories of organizational changes with historical development, these theories can be subjected to a more radical test than they have to pass when merely being confronted with data on short-run changes” (p.612).

See Mintzberg and Rose (2003) on the strategy as realized rather than idealized.

Why History? Booth & Rowlinson

“the approach to problems in business school social science is `universalist and presentist’” (2006,p.6). The former refers to the view that “contemporary organization theory applies to organizational phenomena in all societies at all times,” while the latter refers to research that is reported as if “it occurred in a decontextualized extended present” (Ibid.):

Why History? Kelley et al, 2006

Scientism -- `an excessive belief in the power of scientific knowledge and techniques’ (Oxford American dictionary)Marginalization of alternative perspectives of non-managerial/corporate actors (incl. historical, qualitative, culturally sensitive, and socially radical accounts” (p.605) – see also Burrell & Morgan, 1979; Acker & van Houten, 1972; Runte & Mills, 2006

The problem with history and the past.

Ontological Epistemological Methodological Paradigmatic differences

Ontological

Failure to examine/consider realist nature of the past/history.

Thus, History often perceived as “myopic fact-collecting without a method” (Keiser,1994, p.612)

Epistemological

The past and history are often conflated (with one as the reflection of the other – what is past is history)

The past treated as a given not a problematic (at best a “contextual variable” - Booth & Rowlinson, 2006, p.8) and thus separable from History.

Methodological

The past is often studied apart from History

Much of what counts as historical analyses in business studies – whether by non-historians or historians (including business historians) – does not require the accompaniment of methodological justification: at its best “the copious notes detailing the location of sources in the archives are usually seen as sufficient methodological justification in their own right” (Booth & Rowlinson, 2006, p.9).

History often perceived as “myopic fact-collecting without a method” (Keiser,1994, p.612)

Four Paradigms of Organizational History

The factual approach --aligned with positivism in the argument that “if organization studies were to take account of the facts revealed by history then a number of erroneous assumptions would be undermined” (p.8). From this framework history is viewed as “a repository of facts which, so long as historians properly interpret them, can conveniently confirm or refute preferred or non-preferred theoretical positions in organization studies” (Rowlinson, 2004, p.10).

Exemplar: Delios and Ensign (2000)

Examine “longitudinal aspects of Japanese foreign direct investment in Canada” (p.38).

Develop “a descriptive analysis of entry and exit rates and an econometric analysis of the determinants of subsidiary survival and exit’ (p.38)

Analyze “observations derived from the 1986 and 1994 editions of Japanese Investments Overseas, a Japanese language publication” (p.41) consisting of data from annual surveys of “general managers of all Japanese subsidiaries of which the parent (10% equity interest minimum) is listed on the Tokyo, Osaka, or Nagoya stock exchanges or is a major unlisted firm.”


The narrative approach -- focuses on the role of narrative in the social construction of historical accounts. Here the argument is that History is not so much the skillfully crafted recounting of real, or factual, events from the past so much as a well crafted story about the past that is constructed by the historian through the careful use of narrative.

Exemplar: Hayden White

1) the past consists of innumerable, disparate elements that, by definition, cannot be brought back or reproduced;

2) the historian make choices about which of many stories (histories) to tell by selecting some elements of the past and ignoring others (e.g., the Austin story)

3) interpretation is compounded by the fact that he or she is faced with `traces’ (documents, memories, etc) that are themselves selected interpretations of the past;

4) in constructing a history, much like the novelist, the historian is constrained by a limited number of writing genres for telling a story

White’s Narrative Genres

Emplotment – Romance (e.g., heroic individual) Tragedy (e.g., influence of fate on events) Comedy (e.g., individuals as part of organic whole) Satire (e.g., a focus on chaos)

Tropes metaphor (e.g., Machiavellian) metonymy (e.g.,a word for an attribute - `suits’) synecdoche (e.g., noun represents whole – hired hands) Irony (e.g.,reference to a meaning’s opposite)


The archaeo-genealogical approach – explores through “language the sedimented evidence of the assumptions; the values; the common sense through which a phenomenon (e.g., madness) could have one set of meanings in one era and a contradictory set of meanings in another” (Jacques, 2010: 305); examination of “the conditions under which the different ways of interpreting and evaluating ourselves have come to exist” (Poutanen & Kovalainen, 2010: 263).

The purpose of the genealogical method is to analyze and excavate the taken-for-granted” assumptions that define the present.

Exemplar: Mills (2006)

Juncture: “a concurrence of events in time in which a series of images, impressions, and experiences come together, giving the appearance of a coherent whole that influences how an organization is understood” (Mills, 2010: 509).[Related to Foucauldian notion of episteme and Annales School’s mentalities.]

British Airways, Culture and Gender

#1. The development of an all male organization (1919-24); #2. The introduction and growth of female employment within BA (1924-39); #3. The war years and the rapid expansion of female employment (1940-45); #4 The consolidation and `normalization’ of female employment (1946-1960); #5 The eroticization of female labour (1960-74); #6 The organization as the site of equity struggles (1974-81); #7 The development and consolidation of professionalized female labour

(1981-91); #8 The emergence of a new juncture focused on female management and

leadership (1991-). (Mills, 1994b).

Conclusion

The historic turn in management and organization theory raises questions:

1. “about methods and appropriate styles of writing for more historically oriented research.”

2. “more critical and ethical reflections” and 3. a “thoroughgoing critique of existing theories of

organization for their ahistorical orientation.” (Booth & Rowlinson, 2006, p.7)


ANTi-History – builds on SoK, Poststructuralist History, ANT (Durpos & Mills, 2010)

1. Focuses on the constitution of the past as an outcome of the socio-politics of actor networks.

2. Does not begin by assuming what it is that the researcher wishes to explain or imposing a plot

3.Maps the socio-past by following a series of socio-politics of actor-networks, to understand how they construct their past.

4. Privileges the voice of the actors over that of the historian and privileges the empirical over the theoretical when (re)assembling the traces of the socio-past.


5. Views actor-networks as materially heterogeneous 6. History is viewed as an effect of the interest driven socio-politics of

actor-networks 7. Sees ‘history’ as a punctuated actor or a black box 8. Explores the conditions for the favourable dispersion of a `punctuated

history 9. Acknowledges/exposes the potential instrumentality of historical

accounts 10. Makes transparent the socio-political conditions of the creation of

history. (Based on Durepos, 2009; see also Mills & Durepos, 2010 & Bryman et

al, 2011)

Further Reading

Acker, J., & van Houten, D. R. 1974. Differential recruitment and control: the sex structuring of organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 9(2): 152-163.

Arndt, M., & Bigelow, B. 2005. Professionalizing and Masculinizing a Female Occupation: The Reconceptualization of Hospital Administration in the Early 1900s. Administative Science Quarterly, 50(2): 233-261.

Arnold, W. L., & Brown, J. L. 1986. Tracking Strategy in the Airlines: PWA 1945-84. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 3(2): 171-203.

Austin, B. 1994. ASAC: The Early Years of the Association.1957-1972. Proceedings of the 1994 Administrative Sciences Association of Canada, Business History Interest Group, Halifax, 25-28 June , 15(14): 1-11.

Austin, B. 1995. ASAC And The Crisis In Management Education, 1973-1985. Proceedings of the 1995 Administrative Sciences Association of Canada, Business History Interest Division, Windsor 3-6 June , 16(15).

Austin, B. 1998. The Role of the Administrative Sciences Association in Institutionalizing Management Education in Canada. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 15(3): 255-266.

Austin, B. (Ed.). 2000a. Capitalizing Knowledge. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Austin, B. 2000b. The Administrative Sciences Association of Canada, 1957-1999. In B. Austin (Ed.),

Capitalizing Knowledge: 266-294. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

Further Reading

Austin, B., & Mintzberg, H. 1996. Mirroring Canadian Industrial Policy. Strategy Formation at Dominion Textile from 1873 to 1990. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 13(1): 46-64.

Baum, J. A. C., Rowley, T. J., & Shipilov, A. J. 2004. The Small World of Canadian Capital Markets: Statistical Mechanics of Investment Bank Syndicate Networks, 1952-1989. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 21(4): 307-325.

Baum, J. A. C., & Singh, J. V. 1994. Evolutionary dynamics of organizations. New York: Oxford University Press. Booth, C., & Rowlinson, M. 2006. Management and organizational history: Prospects. Management & Organizational

History, 1(1): 5-30. Burrell, G., & Morgan, G. 1979. Sociological Paradigms and Organizational Analysis. London: Heinemann. Bryman, A., Bell, E., Mills, A.J., and Yue, A.R. (2011) Business Research Methods. 1st Canadian Ed. Toronto: Oxford

University Press, Chapter 21 Cooke, B. 1999. Writing the Left out of Management Theory: The Historiography of the Management of Change.

Organization, 6(1): 81-105. Cooke, B., Mills, A. J., & Kelley, E. S. 2005. Situating Maslow in Cold War America: A Recontextualization of

Management Theory. Group and Organization Management, 30(2): 129-152. Cullen, D. 1997. Maslow, Monkeys and Motivation Theory. Organization, 4(3): 355-373. Czarniawska-Joerges, B. 2004. Narratives in social science research. London ; Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage

Publications.

Further Reading

Delios, A., & Ensign, P. C. 2000. A Subnational Analysis of Japanese Direct Investment in Canada. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 17(1): 38-51.

Durepos, G., Helms Mills, J., & Mills, A. J. 2008a. Flights of fancy: myth, monopoly and the making of Pan American Airways. Journal of Management History, 14(2): 116 - 127.

Durepos, G. 2009. ANTi-History: Towards an historiographical approach to (re)assembling knowledge of the past. PhD Thesis, Department of Management, Sobey School of Business, Saint Mary's University, October 19.

Dye, K. E., Mills, A. J., & Weatherbee, T. G. 2005. Maslow: Man Interrupted -- Reading Management Theory in Context. Management Decision, 43(10): 1375-1395.

Foucault, M. 1965. Madness and civilization; a history of insanity in the age of reason. New York,: Pantheon Books.

Foucault, M. 1972. The archaeology of knowledge. London: Routledge. Foucault, M. 1973. The order of things; an archaeology of the human sciences. New York,: Vintage Books. Foucault, M. 1979. Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. New York: Vintage Books. Foucault, M. 1980a. Power/Knowledge. New York: Pantheon. Foucault, M. 1980b. The History of Sexuality. Vol. 1. New York: Vintage Books. Frost, P. J. 1994. Introduction to Alfred Kieser's `Crossroads - Why Organization Theory Needs Historical Analyses'.

Organzation Science, 5(4): 608. Goldman, P. 1994. Searching for History in Organizational Theory: Comment on Kieser. Organzation Science, 5(4):

621-623.

Further Reading

Jacques, R. 1996. Manufacturing the Employee: Management Knowledge from the 19th to 21st Centuries. London: Sage.

Jacques, R. S. 2006. History, historiography and organization studies: The challenge and the potential. Management & Organizational History, 1(1): 31-49.

Jones, V., & Lane, G. S. 2000. Development by Design: A History of the Faculty of Management at the University of Calgary, 1967-1991. In B. Austin (Ed.), Capitalizing Knowledge: 209-238. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

Kieser, A. 1987. From Asceticism to Administration of Wealth. Medieval Monastries and the Pitfalls of Rationalisation. Organization Studies, 8(2): 103-123.

Kieser, A. 1989. Organizational, Institutional, and Societal Evolution: Medieval Craft Guilds and the Genesis of Formal Organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 34: 540-564.

Kieser, A. 1994. Crossroads - Why Organization Theory Needs Historical Analyses - and How This Should Be Performed. Organization Science, 5(4): 608-620.

Kieser, A. 1997. Rhetoric and Myth in Management Fashion. Organization, 4(1): 49-74. Kelley, E. S., Mills, A. J., & Cooke, B. 2006. Management as a Cold War phenomenon? Human Relations, 59(5): 603-610. Khurana, R. 2007. From Higher Aims To Hired Hands. The Social Transformation of American Business Schools and the

Unfulfilled Promise of Management as a Profession. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Further Reading

Latour, B. 2005. Reassembling the Social. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Leblebici, H., & Sherer, P. D. 2008. Symposium: Bringing History into Organizational Research. Presentation

at the annual meeting of the Academy of Management conference, Anaheim, CA, August 8-11 . McQuarrie, F. A. E. 2005. How the past is present(ed): A comparison of information on the Hawthorne studies in

Canadian management and organizational behaviour textbooks. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 22(3): 230-242.

Mills, A. J. 2006. Sex, Strategy and the Stratosphere: Airlines and the gendering of organizational culture. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Mills, A. J. 2010. Juncture. In A. J. Mills, G. Durepos, & E. Weibe (Eds.), Sage Encylopedia of Case Study Research: 509-511. Thousands Oaks, CA: Sage.

Mills, A. J., & Durepos, G. 2010. ANTi-history. In A. J. Mills, G. Durepos, & E. Wiebe (Eds.), Sage Encyclopedia of Case Study Research, Vol. 1: 26-29. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Mills, A. J., & Helms Mills, J. 2006. Masculinity and the making of Trans-Canada Air Lines, 1937-1940: a feminist poststructuralist account. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 23(1): 34-44.

Mills, A. J., Kelley, E. S., & Cooke, B. 2002. Management theory in context: Exploring the influence of the Cold War. In G. Spraakman (Ed.), Proceedings of the Business History Division of the Administrative Sciences Association of Canada, Vol. 23: 11-20. Winnipeg.

Further Reading

Mintzberg, H., Brunet, J. P., & Waters, J. A. 1986. Does Planning Impede Strategic Thinking? Tracking the Strategies of Air Canada From 1937 to 1976. In R. Lamb, & P. Shrivastava (Eds.), Advances in Strategic Management, Vol. 4: 3-41. Greenwich, CT.: JAI Press.

Mintzberg, H., & Rose, J. 2003. Strategic management upside down: Tracking strategies at McGill University from 1829 to 1980. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 20(4): 270-290.

Ogden, H., & Driscoll, C. 2000. Business Studies at Saint Mary's University: Progress with a Human Touch. In B. Austin (Ed.), Capitalizing Knowledge: 239-251. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

Sexty, R. W. 2000. Stamping Our History: The Story of Canadian Business as Portrayed by Postage Stamps. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 17(4): 332-341.

Sharma, B., & Steier, L. 1990. Management Education and Development in Canada: Past, Present and Future. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 7(1): 1-10.

Üsdiken, B., & Kieser, A. 2004. Introduction: History in Organization Studies. Business History, 46: 321-330. Rowlinson, M. 2004b. Historical Perspectives in Organization Studies: Factual, Narrative, and Archeo-Genealogical. In D. E. Hodgson, & C. Carter (Eds.), Management Knowledge and The New Employee: 8-20. Burlington, VT: Ashgate Publishing Company.

Novicevic, M. M., Harvey, M. G., Buckley, M. R., & Adams, G. L. 2008. Historicism in narrative reviews of strategic management research. Journal of Management History, 14(4): 334-347.

Further Reading

White, H. 1973. Metahistory. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. White, H. 1985. Tropics of Discourse. Essays in Cultural Criticism. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University

Press. Wren, D. A. 1994. The evolution of management thought (4th rev. ed.). New York: Wiley.