Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T07:02:46.607Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Debating Methodology in Business History

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 October 2017

Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Introduction
Information
Business History Review , Volume 91 , Special Issue 3: A Special Issue on Methodologies , Autumn 2017 , pp. 443 - 455
Copyright
Copyright © The President and Fellows of Harvard College 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Recent examples include Lamoreaux, Naomi R., “Reframing the Past: Thoughts about Business Leadership and Decision Making under Uncertainty,” Enterprise & Society 2, no. 4 (2001): 632–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar; O'Sullivan, Mary and Graham, Margaret B. W., “Moving Forward by Looking Backward: Business History and Management Studies,” Journal of Management Studies 47, no. 5 (2010): 775–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Jones, Geoffrey and Friedman, Walter A., “Business History: Time for Debate,” Business History Review 85, no. 1 (2011): 1–8 Google Scholar; Raff, Daniel M. G., “How to Do Things with Time,” Enterprise & Society 14, no. 3 (2013): 435–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Kipping, Matthias and Üsdiken, Behlül, “History and Organization Studies: A Long-Term View,” in Organizations in Time: History, Theory, Methods, ed. Bucheli, Marcelo and Daniel, R. Wadhwani (New York, 2014), 33–55 Google Scholar; de Jong, Abe, Higgins, David Michael, and van Driel, Hugo, “Towards a New Business History?” Business History 57, no. 1 (2015): 5–29 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Decker, Stephanie, Kipping, Matthias, and Wadhwani, Daniel, “New Business Histories! Plurality in Business History Research Methods,” Business History 57, no. 1 (2015): 30–40 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Christina Lubinski and Daniel Wadhwani, “Reinventing Entrepreneurial History,” Business History Review (forthcoming).

2 Beckert, Sven, “History of American Capitalism,” in American History Now, ed. Foner, Eric and McGirr, Lisa (Philadelphia, 2011), 314–35Google Scholar.

3 Gras, N. S. B., “Business History,” Economic History Review 4, no. 4 (1934): 385–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar, reprinted in Friedman, Walter A. and Jones, Geoffrey, eds., Business History (Northampton, Mass, 2013), 3–16 Google Scholar.

4 Cochran, Thomas C., “Arthur Harrison Cole, 1889–1974,” Business History Review 49, no. 1 (1975): 3–4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Crandall, Ruth, The Research Center in Entrepreneurial History at Harvard University, 1948–1958: A Historical Sketch (Cambridge, Mass., 1960)Google Scholar.

5 Redlich, Fritz, “The Role of Theory in the Study of Business History,” Explorations in Entrepreneurial History 4, no. 3 (1952): 137Google Scholar, reprinted in Friedman and Jones, Business History, 44–53.

6 Gerschenkron, Alexander, “Social Attitudes, Entrepreneurship, and Economic Development,” Explorations in Entrepreneurial History 6, no. 1 (1953): 1–19 Google Scholar, reprinted in Friedman and Jones, Business History, 54–72.

7 Chandler, Alfred D., “The Beginnings of ‘Big Business’ in American Industry,” Business History Review 33, no. 1 (1959): 1–31 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

8 Ibid., 3–4.

9 Bailyn, Bernard, “The Problems of the Working Historian: A Comment,” in Hook, Sidney, ed., Philosophy and History (New York, 1963)Google Scholar.

10 Chandler cites an article by Schumpeter that lists the defining characteristic of entrepreneurs as doing “new” things—and gives Rockefeller, Carnegie, Frick, Swift, Duke, and others as examples. See Chandler, “Big Business,” 30. The citation, in Chandler's article, is to Schumpeter, Joseph A., “The Creative Response in Economic History,” Journal of Economic History 7, no. 2 (1947): 151CrossRefGoogle Scholar. He also cites Schumpeter, Theory of Economic Development, trans. Opie, Redvers (Cambridge, Mass., 1934)Google Scholar. See McCraw, Thomas K., Prophet of Innovation: Joseph Schumpeter and Creative Destruction (Cambridge, Mass., 2007), 682Google Scholar; and McCraw, Thomas K., “The Intellectual Odyssey of Alfred D. Chandler, Jr.,” in The Essential Alfred D. Chandler: Essays Toward a Historical Theory of Big Business, ed. McCraw, Thomas K. (Boston, 1988)Google Scholar.

11 Chandler, “Big Business,” 27–28.

12 Chandler, Alfred D., Strategy and Structure: Chapters in the History of the American Industrial Enterprise (Cambridge, Mass., 1962)Google Scholar; Chandler, Alfred D., The Visible Hand: The Managerial Revolution in American Business (Cambridge, Mass., 1977)Google Scholar; Chandler, Alfred D., Scale and Scope: The Dynamics of Industrial Capitalism (Cambridge, Mass., 1990)Google Scholar.

13 Chandler, Alfred D., “Institutional Integration: An Approach to Comparative Studies of the History of Large-Scale Business Enterprise,” Revue économique 27, no. 2 (1976): 177Google Scholar.

14 Hertner, Peter and Jones, Geoffrey, eds., Multinationals: Theory and History (Aldershot, U.K., 1986)Google Scholar; Jones, Geoffrey and Bostock, Frances, “U.S. Multinationals in British Manufacturing before 1962,” Business History Review 70, no. 2 (1996): 207–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Jones, Geoffrey, Multinationals and Global Capitalism (Oxford, 2005)Google Scholar; Buckley, Peter J., “Business History and International Business,” Business History 51, no. 3 (2009): 307–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Verbeke, Alain and Kano, Liena, “The New Internalization Theory and Multinational Enterprises from Emerging Economies: A Business History Perspective,” Business History Review 89, no. 3 (2015): 415–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

15 Wright, Gavin, “Quantitative Economic History in the United States,” in International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, 2nd ed., ed. Wright, James D. (Amsterdam, 2015)Google Scholar; Ran Abramitzky, “Economics and the Modern Economic Historian” NBER Working Paper No. 21636 (Oct. 2015); McCloskey, Deirdre, Economic Maturity and Entrepreneurial Decline: British Iron and Steel (Cambridge, Mass., 1973)Google Scholar; McCloskey, Deirdre, The Rhetoric of Economics (New York, 1985)Google Scholar; McCloskey, Deirdre, Knowledge and Persuasion in Economics (Cambridge, U.K., 1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Fogel, Robert, Railroads and American Economic Growth: Essays in Econometric History (New York, 1964)Google Scholar; and Fogel, Robert and Engerman, Stanley, Time on the Cross (New York, 1974)Google ScholarPubMed. We would like to thank Tom Nicholas for helpful insights on this section.

16 Petra Moser, “Innovation and Patents,” in Oxford Handbook of Economic History, ed. Louis Cain, Price Fishback, and Paul Rhode (Oxford, forthcoming); Nicholas, Tom, “The Role of Independent Invention in U.S. Technological Development, 1880–1930,” Journal of Economic History 70, no. 1 (2010): 57–82 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Nicholas, Tom, “Independent Invention during the Rise of the Corporate Economy in Britain and Japan,” Economic History Review 64, no. 3 (2011): 1–29 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

17 Nunn, Nathan, “The Importance of History for Economic Development,” Annual Review of Economics 1 (2009): 65–92 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

18 Neal, Larry and Williamson, Jeffrey, eds., The Cambridge History of Capitalism, 2 vols. (Cambridge, U.K., 2014)Google Scholar.

19 Sabel, Charles and Zeitlin, Jonathan, “Historical Alternatives to Mass Production: Politics, Markets and Technology in Nineteenth-Century Industrialization,” Past and Present no. 108 (Aug. 1985): 133–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

20 Zeitlin, Jonathan, “The Historical Alternatives Approach,” in The Oxford Handbook of Business History, ed. Jones, Geoffrey and Zeitlin, Jonathan (Oxford, 2008), 120Google Scholar.

21 Scranton, Philip, Endless Novelty: Specialty Production and American Industrialization, 1865–1925 (Princeton, N.J., 1997)Google Scholar.

22 Lamoreaux, “Reframing the Past.”

23 Casson, Mark, The World's First Railway System: Enterprise, Competition, and Regulation on the Railway Network in Victorian Britain (Oxford, 2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

24 Scott, Joan W., “Gender: A Useful Category of Historical Analysis,” American Historical Review 91, no. 5 (1986): 1053–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

25 Aston, Jennifer, Female Entrepreneurship in Nineteenth-Century England (London, 2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Aston, Jennifer and Di Martino, Paolo, “Risk, success, and failure: female entrepreneurship in late Victorian and Edwardian England,” Economic History Review 70, no. 3 (2017): 837–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Kay, Alison C., The Foundations of Female Entrepreneurship: Enterprise, Home and Household in London, 1800–1879 (Oxford, 2009)Google Scholar; Nenadic, Stana, “The Social Shaping of Business Behaviour in the Nineteenth-Century Women's Garment Trades,” Journal of Social History 31, no. 3 (1998), 625–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Nenadic, Stana, “Gender and the Rhetoric of Business Success: The Impact on Women Entrepreneurs and the ‘New Woman’ in Late-Nineteenth Century Edinburgh,” in Women's Work in Industrial England: Regional and Local Perspectives, ed. Goose, Nigel (Hatfield, U.K., 2007)Google Scholar.

26 Jones, Geoffrey, Beauty Imagined: A History of the Global Beauty Industry (Oxford, 2010)Google Scholar. See also Berghoff, Hartmut and Kühne, Thomas, eds., Globalizing Beauty: Consumerism and Body Aesthetics in the Twentieth Century (New York, 2013)Google Scholar.

27 Yeager, Mary A., ed., Women in Business, 3 vols. (Cheltenham, U.K., 1999)Google Scholar.

28 See Business History Review 72, no. 2 (1998)Google Scholar, and 81, no. 3 (2007); and Enterprise & Society 2, no. 1 (2001)Google Scholar, and 2, no. 2 (2001).

29 Hilt, Eric, “Economic History, Historical Analysis, and the ‘New History of Capitalism,’” Journal of Economic History 77, no. 2 (2017): 512CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

30 Wilkins, Mira, The Emergence of Multinational Enterprise: American Business Abroad from the Colonial Era to 1914 (Cambridge, Mass., 1970)Google Scholar; Wilkins, Mira, The Maturing of Multinational Enterprise: American Business Abroad from 1914 to 1970 (Cambridge, Mass., 1974)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

31 Hilt, “Economic History”; Lamoreaux, Naomi, “The Future of Economic History Must Be Interdisciplinary,” Journal of Economic History 75, no. 4 (2015): 1251–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

32 Hilt, “Economic History.”

33 Beckert, Sven, Empire of Cotton: A Global History (New York, 2014)Google Scholar.

34 A point elaborated on by Thomas K. McCraw in his biography of the economist, Prophet of Innovation (Cambridge, Mass., 2007)Google Scholar.

35 Jones, Geoffrey, Profits and Sustainability: A History of Green Entrepreneurship (Oxford, 2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.