Historical neo-institutionalism or neo-institutionalist history? Historical research in management and organization studies

Michael Rowlinson (Collaborator), John Hassard

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

We propose a distinction between historical neo-institutionalism – the use of historical research to advance neo-institutionalist theory, and neo-institutionalist history – the use of neo-institutionalist theory to illuminate historiography. In the first part of the article we compare recognized exemplars for historical neo-institutionalism with the few examples that we could find of research resembling neo-institutionalist history. We demonstrate that the subordination of research to formal methods in historical neo-institutionalism means that it is limited to analyzing particular types of sources, such as published periodicals. By contrast, neo-institutionalist history uses primary sources that are more familiar to business historians, such as internal organizational reports and minutes of meetings. In the second part of the article we present a survey of 55 historical research articles published in Academy of Management Journal, Administrative Science Quarterly, and Organization Science, between 1991 and 2010. The articles are coded for quantitative or qualitative methods, sources used, and periodization. From the survey we demonstrate the prevalence of quantitative historical research, the rarity of archival research, and the preference for recent history.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)111-126
Number of pages15
JournalManagement & Organizational History
Volume8
Issue number2
Publication statusPublished - 2013

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Historical neo-institutionalism or neo-institutionalist history? Historical research in management and organization studies'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this