Educational Traditions and the Development of Business Studies After 1945 (An Anglo-French-German Comparison)

Locke, Robert R.

doi:10.1080/00076798800000005

Cited by 15 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…(Ibid., 57). Locke (1988) and Engwall (2007) make a distinction between the goals of the American and German traditions in management education. According to the American model, it is education that produces managers.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Adoption of managerial ideologies in Finnish academic management education 1960–2007

Seeck

Laakso

2010

Management & Organizational History

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The paper analyses when and how different management paradigms have been adopted for teaching, in the subject of organization and management, by examining the curricula and study guides of the eight main business schools in Finland. The data was analysed in three ways: 1) the analysis of all the reading lists in curricula and study guides, 2) the analyses of subject descriptions in the study guides and 3) the analysis of individual course descriptions in the study guides.Theoretically, the study draws on the literature on German-style and American-style business schools, and on the literature on management paradigms and their dissemination. Our findings indicate that there are differences in the adoption of different management paradigms in management education in German-style and American-style business schools in Finland. For example, between 1980 and 1995, the most commonly used paradigm in teaching in German-style schools was the human relations paradigm, while in American-style schools the most popular paradigm was structural analysis. The results suggest that different traditions in arranging higher management education may have an impact on the content of teaching. This provides an interesting point of departure for investigating the contents of management education in other countries, too.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Adoption of managerial ideologies in Finnish academic management education 1960–2007

Seeck

Laakso

2010

Management & Organizational History

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To join the top, managers and engineers had to possess a PhD in a specialized area. 32 In Spain, for instance, business education was clearly controlled by Franco's dictatorial regime. The goal of management schools was to control the social elites and to tame the anti-capitalistic sentiment in Spanish society and, after the liberalization of the national economy, to aid enterprise transformation and to increase strength in the face of growing pressure from external competitors.…”

Section: Nation State--institution and Corporate Culturementioning

confidence: 99%

The corporate nationality: A question of culture and community?

Godelier

2020

J Mod Eur Hist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many scholars in management and business history are using nationality as a core criterion to classify corporations and to explain their behaviour, values, and strategy. In this perspective, being born in a specific country defined by its frontiers and institutions explicates the values and behaviour of its inhabitants—and companies within this context are described as more ‘German’, ‘Italian’, or ‘French’. However, it does not help to analyse in depth the complex and various differences between what is observable in day-to-day business life and what is in underneath. A better understanding of corporation nationality imposes to use the concept of culture. It implies to underline the fact that ‘nation’ is often delimitated by frontiers and most of the time is the result of political choices. If nationality explains some element of corporate culture, it cannot explain all cultural dimensions. One reason is that culture does not stop at national frontiers. This article has several aims: (1) it discusses the use of nationality as a means to describe and analyse the organizational behaviour of companies and their communities; (2) it interrogates ‘nationality’ as a powerful factor which enables to aggregate different communities within large corporations; and (3) it analyzes how ‘nationality’ is influencing managerial practices. Most of the time, ‘nationality’ is mobilized to describe the global strategy or practices of big corporations. The author argues that nationality is a crucial factor for corporate culture in many ways—not as a ‘given’ fact but as a larger part of the institutional design of a company (and its development).

show abstract

“…This path detached the Norwegian management tradition from its British origins in two ways. Firstly, the British assumption that managers were 'born, not made' was not part of the Norwegian importation of machines and how to do industrial production from the UK (Locke 1988). To some extent, this can be explained by the relative absence of Norwegian nobility historically, and the particular importance of a Norwegian bureaucratic elite in the 19 th century (Sejersted 1993).…”

Section: Context: Two Waves Of Engineering Influence and Educationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Engineering way lost: Norwegian engineers’ reactions to challenges from Americanization and industrial democracy

Nygaard

2020

Management & Organizational History

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article investigates how the Norwegian Engineering Association responded to challenges from Americanization and industrial democracy in the period from 1945 to 1980. This period was the heydays of the engineering way to top management positions in Norway. The engineering way was justified with reference to the engineers technical 'Fachkompetenz'. As in many countries, Norway became subject for an institutional push toward Americanization of management the first decades after WW2. This process challenged the engineering way to management by propagating the need for management education. In Norway, there was not a smooth and swift process of Americanization of management and business. Rather, the Norwegian trajectory is a complex set of international and national influences and agendas. Primarily, Norwegian management practice was from the 1970s shaped by a political push for industrial democracy that was initiated by the Labor party and the labor movement in the 1960s. The process of introducing industrial democracy challenged both the traditional engineering way and the American way of making managers in Norway. This article unpacks how the Engineering Association responded to the challenges from Americanization and industrial democracy.

show abstract

Educational Traditions and the Development of Business Studies After 1945 (An Anglo-French-German Comparison)

Cited by 15 publications

References 0 publications

Adoption of managerial ideologies in Finnish academic management education 1960–2007

Adoption of managerial ideologies in Finnish academic management education 1960–2007

The corporate nationality: A question of culture and community?

Engineering way lost: Norwegian engineers’ reactions to challenges from Americanization and industrial democracy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About