Popular in Professional

Culture and Society

The City as a Growth Machine: Toward a Political Economy of Place

New York University Harvey Moltoch

Education

The Role of Education in Reducing Racial Inequality

University of Southern California Pedro A. Noguera

Law

Diversity and Social Mobility in the UK legal profession

Law Society I. Stephanie Boyce

Internet Law

The Law of AI for Good

University of San Diego Orly Lobel

Pharmacy

Cytotoxic Activity and Anti-Migratory Effect of Berberine-Phytantriol Liquid Crystalline on Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer

University of Technology Sydney Kamal Dua

Human Rights Law

Transforming Restorative Justice for Transitional Settings

University of Nottingham Kerry Clamp

Education

A narrative of the historic turn in organization studies

View more insights in Professional - Business - Leadership

View more figures from University of Exeter

View the page of Michael Rowlinson

Read the Study

Michael Rowlinson discusses that the status of historical narratives in management studies is a key issue for the historic turn.

Image courtesy of interviewee. March 25, 2024

Generating Workspace

Export as PDF

The speaker discusses their contribution to the "Handbook of Historical Methods for Management," which culminates a historic turn in management studies over the past two decades. They emphasize the importance of articulating historical methods in management research to align with conventional social science standards. The speaker, along with co-authors, decided to focus on narrative as a legitimate historical method, highlighting its significance in telling stories that connect historical events in management. They reflect on their experiences revisiting past works and stress that effective historical writing should incorporate narrative, making it engaging rather than strictly analytical.

The speaker also explains their current research project on internal communication in organizations, particularly how historical narratives have shaped corporate culture. They address the need for organizations to confront their pasts and effectively communicate this history, especially in light of contemporary issues like corporate social responsibility. The speaker expresses optimism that their work will help legitimize storytelling in academic settings and facilitate more impactful historical research in management. They hope to contribute to a broader conversation about internal communication and the use of historical narratives to enhance organizational identity and action.

Language:

Export as PDF

X-TIMESTAMP-MAP:LOCAL=00:00:00.000,MPEGTS=900000

00:00.195 --> 00:03.845
This, chapter is in, a book,

00:03.925 --> 00:05.085
I dunno if you can see the book.

00:05.385 --> 00:08.725
Uh, this is the Handbook of Historical Methods

00:08.825 --> 00:13.085
for Management, edited by Stephanie Decker,

00:13.595 --> 00:15.925
bill Foster, and Elena Gev.

00:17.345 --> 00:20.365
And, really it's the culmination of,

00:20.825 --> 00:25.285
of the historic term in many ways in management.

00:25.285 --> 00:29.285
Because if we are talking about history in management in the

00:29.445 --> 00:31.925
business school, then we're talking

00:31.925 --> 00:33.165
to other social scientists

00:33.165 --> 00:36.805
and they expect us to be able to articulate our methods,

00:36.945 --> 00:39.365
our research methods, in the way that they do

00:40.425 --> 00:42.365
in a conventional,

00:42.825 --> 00:45.205
method section in their research papers.

00:47.015 --> 00:49.675
So part of a historic turn has been

00:49.975 --> 00:53.195
to articulate historical methods for management.

00:53.695 --> 00:56.955
And this book is the culmination of that.

00:57.065 --> 00:59.435
It's about 20 years in the making.

01:00.175 --> 01:03.675
Uh, and so it's a fantastic thing to be part of.

01:03.735 --> 01:07.435
And when they said, would I like to write a chapter,

01:07.785 --> 01:09.435
then we discussed what it could be on.

01:09.435 --> 01:12.795
And I, I, I agreed to write the chapter with Stephanie

01:12.855 --> 01:15.475
and, John Hasard, Stephanie Decker

01:15.475 --> 01:19.715
and John Hassard, who are my longtime co-authors,

01:20.205 --> 01:23.915
about narrative and the role of narrative

01:23.915 --> 01:27.275
because people don't usually write about narrative

01:27.415 --> 01:30.715
as a method, 'cause it, it's just what historians do.

01:32.095 --> 01:34.995
But I decided that it would be a good idea

01:35.055 --> 01:38.955
to articulate narrative as a method,

01:39.935 --> 01:41.035
in this chapter.

01:41.415 --> 01:42.715
And, and it was fun to do

01:43.235 --> 01:45.915
'cause it meant revisiting all these old papers

01:45.915 --> 01:47.955
that I'd written quite a long time ago.

01:48.695 --> 01:52.755
Uh, I think the first paper

01:53.345 --> 01:56.635
with the term historic term was 2004.

01:57.275 --> 02:01.875
I wrote a paper called, the Treatment of History

02:01.875 --> 02:04.235
and Organization Studies towards a Historic

02:04.265 --> 02:05.315
Term question mark.

02:06.215 --> 02:10.805
And, so 20 years on this book's

02:11.895 --> 02:14.545
been out the Historical Methods for management.

02:14.685 --> 02:17.665
So I think the historic term has been well underway.

02:18.055 --> 02:19.185
It's, it's ironic

02:19.255 --> 02:22.865
because when we wrote the paper, we said, well,

02:22.865 --> 02:24.945
various people have tried to make management

02:24.945 --> 02:26.545
and organization studies more historical.

02:26.545 --> 02:27.665
But when you read the stuff,

02:27.935 --> 02:29.425
it's not really very historical.

02:29.705 --> 02:30.905
'cause they don't tell stories.

02:30.935 --> 02:33.905
They don't write narratives in the way that historians do.

02:34.975 --> 02:37.105
They do a bit more, they do now a bit.

02:37.255 --> 02:39.305
Well, our main interest has been talking

02:39.365 --> 02:41.625
to other academics in the business school.

02:42.325 --> 02:44.785
Uh, alongside that, each

02:44.785 --> 02:48.025
of us have done various historical projects.

02:48.845 --> 02:50.345
Um, the, the main project

02:50.345 --> 02:53.665
that I'm involved in at the moment is a history of

02:54.225 --> 02:56.385
internal communication in organizations.

02:57.065 --> 02:58.865
Starting out really in the early

02:59.925 --> 03:03.205
20th century, or going back to the end of the 19th century

03:03.995 --> 03:07.405
when companies started to produce magazines

03:07.425 --> 03:08.645
for their employees mainly.

03:09.795 --> 03:11.735
Uh, and these, these became a real

03:12.405 --> 03:14.415
institution in many big companies.

03:14.675 --> 03:16.655
Almost all companies had had one.

03:17.515 --> 03:18.815
Um, and that was,

03:19.245 --> 03:21.015
they didn't use the term corporate culture,

03:21.155 --> 03:24.895
but that was the vehicle that they used to try to create a,

03:24.975 --> 03:29.615
a sense of community in the workforce, to foster a a

03:29.615 --> 03:32.335
what we would now call a, a corporate culture, shall we say.

03:33.075 --> 03:35.255
Um, and a mainstay of that kind

03:35.255 --> 03:38.295
of communication is the history of the organization itself.

03:38.915 --> 03:42.095
Uh, commemorative events, anniversaries

03:42.675 --> 03:47.375
and anniversaries of individuals, births, marriages,

03:48.195 --> 03:49.775
deaths, et cetera.

03:50.075 --> 03:54.535
So the past to some extent, constitutes that kind

03:54.615 --> 03:55.815
of internal communication.

03:56.555 --> 04:00.875
The whole book is just about every method

04:00.945 --> 04:02.795
that you can think about.

04:03.545 --> 04:05.475
It's not really a quantitative methods.

04:06.295 --> 04:11.095
Um, but, the, the book as a whole,

04:11.755 --> 04:14.675
is trying to,

04:16.645 --> 04:19.785
the issue, the way I put it is,

04:20.815 --> 04:22.745
what would you put in the method section

04:24.045 --> 04:28.415
of a historical paper that you send to a management journal,

04:28.555 --> 04:29.575
an academic journal?

04:30.165 --> 04:31.735
What do you put in the method section?

04:32.555 --> 04:36.855
Um, and initially when people tried to answer that question,

04:36.965 --> 04:39.735
they, they kind of said, well, we are historians.

04:39.735 --> 04:42.415
There is one historical method, there's one way.

04:42.445 --> 04:45.715
This is the way you do history.

04:47.205 --> 04:49.265
And I said, no, that's not the case.

04:49.545 --> 04:52.415
'cause people do history in all sorts of different ways.

04:52.845 --> 04:54.055
They have different approaches,

04:54.085 --> 04:56.055
they just don't usually articulate it.

04:56.675 --> 04:59.855
And what's more, if we all did exactly the same thing,

05:00.045 --> 05:02.975
that would make for a very boring method section

05:03.835 --> 05:05.655
in every historical paper

05:05.715 --> 05:06.895
you submit to a management journal.

05:07.055 --> 05:08.935
'cause they'd all be the same. So that's a,

05:08.935 --> 05:10.095
that's a non-starter.

05:10.435 --> 05:12.455
So I said, let's, let's try to think about

05:12.695 --> 05:14.855
what are the different ways in which

05:14.875 --> 05:16.495
people approach history.

05:16.515 --> 05:20.215
And we, we did this, this was a paper that was, again,

05:20.325 --> 05:22.095
published about 10 years ago.

05:22.395 --> 05:26.455
Me, John, and Stephanie, the same team in the Academy

05:26.515 --> 05:29.255
of Management Review, which was a kind of a landmark paper,

05:29.255 --> 05:30.535
which said, well, what the

05:31.245 --> 05:34.255
alternative ways in which we could write history.

05:34.345 --> 05:37.255
Let's not write the historical method.

05:37.305 --> 05:40.135
Let's try to articulate different approaches

05:40.525 --> 05:41.815
that you could have.

05:42.595 --> 05:46.415
Um, and to some extent that depends on how narrative,

05:47.155 --> 05:48.655
how much narrative you want.

05:48.755 --> 05:50.495
How much storytelling do you want to have?

05:50.915 --> 05:52.495
Is it gonna be mainly storytelling

05:52.715 --> 05:55.055
or is it gonna be mainly analytical?

05:55.885 --> 05:57.685
Well, that's a terminology

05:57.835 --> 06:00.645
that we've borrowed from literary theorists.

06:01.145 --> 06:04.085
So literary theorists talk about, you know, how is a,

06:04.265 --> 06:05.765
how is a narrative constructed?

06:05.905 --> 06:08.725
And the first thing to think about is what's the story?

06:08.795 --> 06:13.415
What, what are the events that you're gonna, talk about?

06:14.515 --> 06:17.375
And then you, you can't just have a series

06:17.395 --> 06:19.295
of random disconnected events.

06:19.295 --> 06:22.375
You need some kind of connection, something that connection

06:22.885 --> 06:24.095
connect connects them.

06:24.095 --> 06:26.255
And that's the plot. Why does one

06:26.255 --> 06:27.575
thing lead to another thing?

06:27.755 --> 06:31.215
What's the plot? And then the author thinks, well,

06:31.215 --> 06:32.415
how am I gonna present this?

06:32.515 --> 06:34.455
What's the form that it's gonna take?

06:34.575 --> 06:37.535
I mean, in, in, in many ways that's dictated

06:37.555 --> 06:39.735
for you if you're writing for an academic paper,

06:39.935 --> 06:42.775
'cause you have to have the paraphernalia of references

06:42.915 --> 06:44.295
and footnotes, et cetera.

06:44.875 --> 06:48.495
Uh, but you still have decisions as to how to periodize, how

06:48.495 --> 06:52.665
to chunk up the different, periods that you're gonna

06:53.245 --> 06:55.065
use, what you're gonna call those periods.

06:55.605 --> 06:57.705
And how just

06:57.705 --> 07:00.145
because things happen in a chronological order,

07:00.605 --> 07:03.465
you don't necessarily have to relate them in exactly

07:03.465 --> 07:04.625
that chronological order.

07:04.725 --> 07:07.265
You can decide how to relate them going back,

07:07.265 --> 07:08.945
looking forwards, looking backwards.

07:09.645 --> 07:11.825
And that's what I was trying

07:11.825 --> 07:13.905
to demonstrate in this particular chapter.

07:14.605 --> 07:18.905
And, and in principle, if you're gonna tell somebody how

07:18.925 --> 07:23.165
to write a narrative instead of a kind of a toolkit,

07:23.565 --> 07:26.605
I thought, well, the best way in principle is

07:26.605 --> 07:28.845
to write a narrative myself.

07:29.885 --> 07:33.945
So me, John, and Stephanie agreed to write this narrative

07:34.085 --> 07:35.265
of the historic term.

07:36.085 --> 07:40.575
So it's a kind of a chronological story of

07:41.305 --> 07:43.255
let's say the story would be the events.

07:43.285 --> 07:45.495
Well, these would, these would be the key publications

07:46.045 --> 07:47.895
over a say a 20 year period.

07:48.675 --> 07:51.655
And then the plot, the plot is kind of ironic

07:51.655 --> 07:52.975
because what we're saying, well,

07:53.145 --> 07:55.815
there have been these landmark papers, yes,

07:55.965 --> 07:58.375
there's been more history in business schools,

07:58.565 --> 08:01.055
more history published in management journals.

08:01.715 --> 08:05.095
But ironically, as history's become more accepted,

08:05.965 --> 08:07.975
narrative tends to get marginalized.

08:08.215 --> 08:09.775
'cause they, they, they want it

08:09.775 --> 08:11.735
to be more systematic, more analytical.

08:13.235 --> 08:15.895
But every now and again, somebody publishes a great paper.

08:16.675 --> 08:20.775
And it is the royal way of telling is a story.

08:21.275 --> 08:26.075
Uh, and my co-author John Hasad did a story about,

08:26.955 --> 08:29.865
I dunno if you've ever heard of the Hawthorne experiments.

08:30.205 --> 08:32.385
He revisited the Hawthorne experiments, one

08:32.385 --> 08:34.465
of the most famous studies in management.

08:35.125 --> 08:37.745
And it was a story, and it's a great story

08:38.285 --> 08:40.825
and it don't, so every now and again, somebody comes back

08:40.825 --> 08:42.785
and says, well the way to really get to grips

08:42.785 --> 08:44.025
with this is to tell a great story.

08:44.685 --> 08:46.745
The story is the, is the event.

08:46.805 --> 08:51.635
So in, in this paper, the story would consist

08:51.635 --> 08:52.875
of the key publications.

08:53.175 --> 08:56.325
So I've selected a set of key publications, said, right,

08:56.365 --> 08:58.405
I wanna get all these key publications.

08:58.745 --> 09:00.725
So how could I do this differently?

09:00.795 --> 09:02.165
Well, typically in management,

09:02.165 --> 09:03.965
what you would do is you would say, right,

09:03.995 --> 09:06.365
I've got say 20 papers here that I want

09:06.365 --> 09:09.005
to talk about, selected the key papers.

09:09.465 --> 09:13.445
Now I'm gonna do, a little matrix two by two matrix

09:13.625 --> 09:17.505
and say, right, I'm gonna put five in this box, two

09:17.505 --> 09:18.785
by two matrix, four boxes.

09:18.935 --> 09:21.825
I'll put five in this box, five in this box, six in

09:21.825 --> 09:23.985
that box, four in that box or whatever.

09:24.365 --> 09:26.585
And that, and say, this is how they

09:27.335 --> 09:29.315
are different along two dimensions.

09:29.385 --> 09:30.995
That would be the classic way to

09:31.685 --> 09:33.555
write a paper in management.

09:34.225 --> 09:36.955
Instead of doing that, what I've said is right here are the

09:36.955 --> 09:37.995
20 odd papers.

09:38.695 --> 09:40.315
I'm gonna more

09:40.315 --> 09:42.955
or less tell you a chronological order of them.

09:43.535 --> 09:44.795
Not exactly chronological

09:45.275 --> 09:48.075
'cause some of them go in a little sequence.

09:48.075 --> 09:49.275
And then there's another sequence

09:49.275 --> 09:50.475
of say, half a dozen papers.

09:50.475 --> 09:53.235
And there might be an overlap between those two sequences.

09:53.815 --> 09:58.535
But really it's a broadly chronological,

09:58.705 --> 10:00.255
story with the papers in order.

10:00.315 --> 10:02.575
But it can't be just, well, there was this one

10:02.955 --> 10:05.175
and then there was that one, and then there was that one.

10:05.175 --> 10:08.015
There has to be something that says what connects them.

10:08.315 --> 10:10.375
And what connects them is the plot

10:10.995 --> 10:15.175
and the narrative is the form in which I decided to tell it.

10:15.535 --> 10:18.375
I could have told it as a personal story.

10:18.505 --> 10:20.535
There was me, M**k

10:20.995 --> 10:25.855
and I met some friends, bill, John, Stephanie,

10:26.115 --> 10:28.855
and we had a pint here and we went for coffee there.

10:29.485 --> 10:31.415
That could have been a different way to tell,

10:31.415 --> 10:35.475
it would've been the same, more or less the same plot,

10:35.495 --> 10:36.835
but a different kind of narrative.

10:37.295 --> 10:40.195
But I thought, no, this has got to be an academic narrative.

10:40.395 --> 10:41.435
'cause it's an academic book.

10:41.575 --> 10:43.875
So I'm gonna have this series of papers,

10:44.415 --> 10:47.075
but I'm not gonna put them into a two by two matrix.

10:47.335 --> 10:49.355
I'm not gonna discuss it analytically.

10:49.895 --> 10:52.595
I'm gonna discuss them in a kind of a story.

10:53.055 --> 10:56.515
If you want to know how to write a story, don't try

10:56.515 --> 10:58.275
and write it as a toolkit.

10:58.635 --> 11:02.355
'cause that, that's a contradiction in terms to say, well,

11:02.355 --> 11:05.435
if you want to write a story, this is, this is

11:05.435 --> 11:06.875
how I came to write this story.

11:07.475 --> 11:10.395
I think of it sometimes, like, telling a joke.

11:10.495 --> 11:14.035
You know, I've got a book somewhere about, somebody

11:14.035 --> 11:16.395
who went on a course on how to, how to do comedy.

11:17.415 --> 11:21.725
But if you wrote a good story,

11:23.975 --> 11:25.955
you wouldn't need a methods chapter

11:26.015 --> 11:27.835
to tell you how you wrote it.

11:27.895 --> 11:29.275
You just enjoy the story.

11:29.655 --> 11:33.395
So it's a little bit forced to say, this is how

11:33.415 --> 11:35.155
to write a study.

11:35.935 --> 11:37.715
The proof of it will be, if,

11:38.295 --> 11:41.595
if it improves people's writing in management makes them

11:41.595 --> 11:44.805
think about, well, do I want

11:44.805 --> 11:46.885
to present this stuff analytically

11:47.545 --> 11:52.155
or would it be better to present this in a narrative form?

11:53.205 --> 11:56.585
If more people said, yeah, I could present this

11:56.585 --> 11:59.265
as a narrative, that would be really interesting that,

11:59.295 --> 12:02.055
that then that would be a success.

12:02.275 --> 12:05.335
People naturally tell you stories if you interview them.

12:05.795 --> 12:09.295
Um, I just did some, a couple of interviews,

12:10.465 --> 12:14.815
about something completely different about,

12:15.885 --> 12:18.135
what, whether lecturers wear suits

12:18.135 --> 12:19.735
to work when they're lecturing.

12:20.135 --> 12:22.135
I just happened to be doing an interview and,

12:22.235 --> 12:25.095
and the best bits of the interview is when the interviewee

12:25.275 --> 12:29.815
who was asking about this, starts telling me stories,

12:29.905 --> 12:32.935
funny stories about, you know, where he used to work and,

12:33.435 --> 12:36.455
and, the students, it was eight o'clock in the morning,

12:36.795 --> 12:38.775
an early start, and he said, some of the students used

12:38.775 --> 12:41.135
to come in pajamas and I was wearing a suit.

12:41.155 --> 12:43.135
You know, so people tell you stories.

12:43.875 --> 12:48.655
Uh, and so yeah, management is, is a good,

12:49.415 --> 12:51.875
almost anything is lends itself to stories.

12:52.015 --> 12:56.375
It, it is whether storytelling is seen

12:56.475 --> 12:58.935
as a legit, legitimate way to make a point.

12:59.235 --> 13:04.215
And in academic journals, it tends not

13:04.215 --> 13:05.655
to be so legitimate.

13:06.235 --> 13:09.735
So what I've been trying to do is to write stuff that

13:10.565 --> 13:12.255
legitimates more history

13:12.795 --> 13:16.655
and reflecting on how to write it,

13:17.105 --> 13:21.615
makes it less, yeah, hopefully makes it

13:22.715 --> 13:25.045
more reputable as a, as a a format.

13:25.825 --> 13:28.565
You know, you're always gonna have people who know I say,

13:28.565 --> 13:31.605
no, no, no, it is gotta be, it's gotta look scientific.

13:31.825 --> 13:34.245
And, you know, you gotta have analysis

13:34.425 --> 13:38.525
and preferably quants, and that's all fine.

13:39.435 --> 13:42.695
But I think there's a space for storytelling, a turn in

13:43.555 --> 13:44.655
an academic field.

13:45.165 --> 13:48.575
It's never a turn where everyone turns in one direction.

13:48.685 --> 13:51.535
It's a tendency, I I suppose you could call it a

13:51.535 --> 13:53.495
historical tendency in management.

13:54.195 --> 13:58.375
Um, well, I think this book, as I'm,

13:58.555 --> 14:00.975
as I'm trying to plug obviously is,

14:01.595 --> 14:06.355
is in many ways the culmination of this, historic term,

14:06.855 --> 14:08.595
historical methods for management.

14:08.695 --> 14:11.715
I'm, I'm really pleased that, I mean, I know,

14:11.875 --> 14:14.675
I know these three authors, the, the editors,

14:14.675 --> 14:17.715
obviously Stephanie Decker is one of my co-authors.

14:18.335 --> 14:23.045
And, so hopefully this is a kind of the culmination

14:23.045 --> 14:27.085
of it, but it's obviously more diffused now when it started,

14:27.865 --> 14:31.005
when we published this paper 20 years ago,

14:31.185 --> 14:33.805
it took a long time to get any acceptance.

14:34.425 --> 14:37.445
Um, I think one,

14:37.775 --> 14:40.725
other people independently have come to the sort of similar

14:42.275 --> 14:46.915
i, conclusion, especially a group in,

14:47.105 --> 14:49.635
well, the group that Bill Foster is involved with.

14:49.975 --> 14:53.085
And one of the concepts that they came up with was,

14:53.445 --> 14:56.725
rhetorical history, which is looking at how

14:57.795 --> 15:01.685
organizations actually use their past in the pres in the

15:01.685 --> 15:04.045
present to legitimate themselves

15:04.745 --> 15:08.125
and also historic corporate social responsibility.

15:08.265 --> 15:12.975
How companies are increasingly being asked to

15:13.915 --> 15:15.375
be responsible for everything

15:15.375 --> 15:17.095
that happens in their value chains.

15:17.515 --> 15:19.295
You know, for example,

15:19.365 --> 15:22.335
they have the modern slavery statement on many corporate

15:22.335 --> 15:25.215
websites to say, look, we've looked through the value chain

15:25.315 --> 15:28.015
and far as we, as far as we can make out there,

15:28.015 --> 15:30.335
there's no forced labor in any

15:30.335 --> 15:33.175
of our supply chain, which is great.

15:34.035 --> 15:38.065
Um, but increasingly

15:38.625 --> 15:41.665
companies are being asked to say, what about in your past?

15:42.365 --> 15:45.545
Um, have you always, and

15:45.565 --> 15:49.545
and obviously many organizations discover things in their

15:49.545 --> 15:52.425
past that they wouldn't do now,

15:52.965 --> 15:55.505
or they might wish they, they hadn't done.

15:55.525 --> 15:59.785
And it's how, how they decide to maybe come clean about that

16:00.005 --> 16:01.185
or present it.

16:01.845 --> 16:06.295
Um, so these concepts of rhetorical history,

16:06.515 --> 16:09.695
how companies use history strategically,

16:09.845 --> 16:11.735
obviously organizations are a product

16:11.835 --> 16:14.135
of their past in the way that they do things, that,

16:14.135 --> 16:16.455
the routines that they have, the different ways

16:16.455 --> 16:20.565
that they innovate, but they can also have

16:21.525 --> 16:23.325
exercise, some control an agency about

16:23.325 --> 16:25.925
how they present their past in order

16:25.945 --> 16:28.205
to legitimate themselves in the present.

16:28.545 --> 16:31.725
So that's concept of rhetorical history, which is,

16:31.775 --> 16:36.085
which has really taken off, which I would say is in parallel

16:36.155 --> 16:39.285
with the historic term, which I've been talking about.

16:39.745 --> 16:43.725
And this concept of historic corporate social responsibility

16:44.545 --> 16:47.325
is increasingly relevant recently

16:47.435 --> 16:49.365
because of the Black Lives Matter.

16:49.945 --> 16:54.745
Um, so last week, I took a group

16:54.745 --> 16:57.345
of students to, the Bank of England

16:58.045 --> 17:02.525
and the Bank of England has a special exhibition in their

17:02.545 --> 17:06.005
museum about the bank and slavery.

17:06.905 --> 17:10.045
Um, so that's the Bank of England coming to terms with

17:10.825 --> 17:14.155
what's a, could be perceived as a difficult past.

17:15.095 --> 17:19.315
I'm hoping that the, that the book will facilitate people

17:19.335 --> 17:23.235
who are publishing, historical stuff,

17:23.585 --> 17:26.995
will allow them to make it even easier for them

17:27.095 --> 17:29.835
to get published in management journals.

17:29.955 --> 17:33.635
I, I think there's been a, a big change that journals,

17:34.155 --> 17:35.635
academic journals are much more receptive

17:35.635 --> 17:36.995
to this kind of material.

17:38.355 --> 17:42.285
I hope coming out of the research that I'm doing on,

17:43.245 --> 17:47.525
internal communication, I hope that we can come up with some

17:48.155 --> 17:51.295
helpful suggestions for organizations as how, how

17:51.715 --> 17:52.735
to deal with the past.

17:52.835 --> 17:55.935
We, we can look at examples of organizations that have dealt

17:55.935 --> 17:58.415
with it better perhaps than others,

17:58.835 --> 18:01.295
and try to draw out the lessons

18:01.755 --> 18:04.415
and say to organizations, well, if you're thinking about,

18:04.715 --> 18:06.455
and they're already consultants who,

18:06.645 --> 18:10.655
there's a big consulting, not big consulting industry,

18:10.715 --> 18:13.175
but there is a consultancy industry.

18:13.175 --> 18:14.895
There's a company, the History Factory,

18:15.265 --> 18:18.735
which will advise organizations how to deal with their past

18:18.835 --> 18:22.215
and archivists, are interested in this.

18:22.235 --> 18:24.215
So I think we'd like to be part of that

18:24.765 --> 18:28.655
more practical debate as well as the academic debates.

18:28.955 --> 18:32.055
So the academic debates about getting more historical stuff

18:32.055 --> 18:33.575
published in academic journals.

18:33.875 --> 18:37.135
But alongside that, I hope that we can have a discussion of,

18:37.845 --> 18:41.575
well what about the internal communications as a profession

18:41.835 --> 18:45.455
and archivist who working companies as a profession,

18:45.915 --> 18:49.175
how they can, raise their profile

18:49.435 --> 18:53.575
and have discussions with academics about how

18:53.835 --> 18:55.895
to improve communication in organizations.

18:56.085 --> 18:57.655
That would be brilliant.

00:00 - This, chapter is in, a book, I dunno if you can see the book. this is the Handbook of Historical Methods for Management, edited by Stephanie Decker, bill Foster, and Elena Gev. And, really it's the culmination of,

00:20 - of the historic term in many ways in management. Because if we are talking about history in management in the business school, then we're talking to other social scientists and they expect us to be able to articulate our methods, our research methods, in the way that they do in a conventional, method section in their research papers. So part of a historic turn has been to articulate historical methods for management.

00:53 - And this book is the culmination of that. It's about 20 years in the making. and so it's a fantastic thing to be part of. And when they said, would I like to write a chapter, then we discussed what it could be on. And I, I, I agreed to write the chapter with Stephanie and, John Hasard, Stephanie Decker and John Hassard, who are my longtime co-authors, about narrative and the role of narrative because people don't usually write about narrative

01:27 - as a method, 'cause it, it's just what historians do. But I decided that it would be a good idea to articulate narrative as a method, in this chapter. And, and it was fun to do 'cause it meant revisiting all these old papers that I'd written quite a long time ago. I think the first paper with the term historic term was 2004. I wrote a paper called, the Treatment of History

02:01 - and Organization Studies towards a Historic Term question mark. And, so 20 years on this book's been out the Historical Methods for management. So I think the historic term has been well underway. It's, it's ironic because when we wrote the paper, we said, well, various people have tried to make management and organization studies more historical. But when you read the stuff,

02:27 - it's not really very historical. 'cause they don't tell stories. They don't write narratives in the way that historians do. They do a bit more, they do now a bit. Well, our main interest has been talking to other academics in the business school. alongside that, each of us have done various historical projects. the, the main project that I'm involved in at the moment is a history of

02:54 - internal communication in organizations. Starting out really in the early 20th century, or going back to the end of the 19th century when companies started to produce magazines for their employees mainly. and these, these became a real institution in many big companies. Almost all companies had had one. and that was, they didn't use the term corporate culture,

03:21 - but that was the vehicle that they used to try to create a, a sense of community in the workforce, to foster a a what we would now call a, a corporate culture, shall we say. and a mainstay of that kind of communication is the history of the organization itself. commemorative events, anniversaries and anniversaries of individuals, births, marriages, deaths, et cetera. So the past to some extent, constitutes that kind of internal communication.

03:56 - The whole book is just about every method that you can think about. It's not really a quantitative methods. but, the, the book as a whole, is trying to, the issue, the way I put it is, what would you put in the method section of a historical paper that you send to a management journal, an academic journal? What do you put in the method section?

04:32 - and initially when people tried to answer that question, they, they kind of said, well, we are historians. There is one historical method, there's one way. This is the way you do history. And I said, no, that's not the case. 'cause people do history in all sorts of different ways. They have different approaches, they just don't usually articulate it. And what's more, if we all did exactly the same thing, that would make for a very boring method section

05:03 - in every historical paper you submit to a management journal. 'cause they'd all be the same. So that's a, that's a non-starter. So I said, let's, let's try to think about what are the different ways in which people approach history. And we, we did this, this was a paper that was, again, published about 10 years ago. Me, John, and Stephanie, the same team in the Academy

05:26 - of Management Review, which was a kind of a landmark paper, which said, well, what the alternative ways in which we could write history. Let's not write the historical method. Let's try to articulate different approaches that you could have. and to some extent that depends on how narrative, how much narrative you want. How much storytelling do you want to have? Is it gonna be mainly storytelling

05:52 - or is it gonna be mainly analytical? Well, that's a terminology that we've borrowed from literary theorists. So literary theorists talk about, you know, how is a, how is a narrative constructed? And the first thing to think about is what's the story? What, what are the events that you're gonna, talk about? And then you, you can't just have a series of random disconnected events. You need some kind of connection, something that connection

06:22 - connect connects them. And that's the plot. Why does one thing lead to another thing? What's the plot? And then the author thinks, well, how am I gonna present this? What's the form that it's gonna take? I mean, in, in, in many ways that's dictated for you if you're writing for an academic paper, 'cause you have to have the paraphernalia of references and footnotes, et cetera.

06:44 - but you still have decisions as to how to periodize, how to chunk up the different, periods that you're gonna use, what you're gonna call those periods. And how just because things happen in a chronological order, you don't necessarily have to relate them in exactly that chronological order. You can decide how to relate them going back, looking forwards, looking backwards. And that's what I was trying

07:11 - to demonstrate in this particular chapter. And, and in principle, if you're gonna tell somebody how to write a narrative instead of a kind of a toolkit, I thought, well, the best way in principle is to write a narrative myself. So me, John, and Stephanie agreed to write this narrative of the historic term. So it's a kind of a chronological story of let's say the story would be the events. Well, these would, these would be the key publications

07:46 - over a say a 20 year period. And then the plot, the plot is kind of ironic because what we're saying, well, there have been these landmark papers, yes, there's been more history in business schools, more history published in management journals. But ironically, as history's become more accepted, narrative tends to get marginalized. 'cause they, they, they want it to be more systematic, more analytical.

08:13 - But every now and again, somebody publishes a great paper. And it is the royal way of telling is a story. and my co-author John Hasad did a story about, I dunno if you've ever heard of the Hawthorne experiments. He revisited the Hawthorne experiments, one of the most famous studies in management. And it was a story, and it's a great story and it don't, so every now and again, somebody comes back and says, well the way to really get to grips with this is to tell a great story.

08:44 - The story is the, is the event. So in, in this paper, the story would consist of the key publications. So I've selected a set of key publications, said, right, I wanna get all these key publications. So how could I do this differently? Well, typically in management, what you would do is you would say, right, I've got say 20 papers here that I want to talk about, selected the key papers.

09:09 - Now I'm gonna do, a little matrix two by two matrix and say, right, I'm gonna put five in this box, two by two matrix, four boxes. I'll put five in this box, five in this box, six in that box, four in that box or whatever. And that, and say, this is how they are different along two dimensions. That would be the classic way to write a paper in management. Instead of doing that, what I've said is right here are the

09:36 - 20 odd papers. I'm gonna more or less tell you a chronological order of them. Not exactly chronological 'cause some of them go in a little sequence. And then there's another sequence of say, half a dozen papers. And there might be an overlap between those two sequences. But really it's a broadly chronological, story with the papers in order.

10:00 - But it can't be just, well, there was this one and then there was that one, and then there was that one. There has to be something that says what connects them. And what connects them is the plot and the narrative is the form in which I decided to tell it. I could have told it as a personal story. There was me, M**k and I met some friends, bill, John, Stephanie, and we had a pint here and we went for coffee there. That could have been a different way to tell,

10:31 - it would've been the same, more or less the same plot, but a different kind of narrative. But I thought, no, this has got to be an academic narrative. 'cause it's an academic book. So I'm gonna have this series of papers, but I'm not gonna put them into a two by two matrix. I'm not gonna discuss it analytically. I'm gonna discuss them in a kind of a story. If you want to know how to write a story, don't try and write it as a toolkit.

10:58 - 'cause that, that's a contradiction in terms to say, well, if you want to write a story, this is, this is how I came to write this story. I think of it sometimes, like, telling a joke. You know, I've got a book somewhere about, somebody who went on a course on how to, how to do comedy. But if you wrote a good story, you wouldn't need a methods chapter to tell you how you wrote it. You just enjoy the story.

11:29 - So it's a little bit forced to say, this is how to write a study. The proof of it will be, if, if it improves people's writing in management makes them think about, well, do I want to present this stuff analytically or would it be better to present this in a narrative form? If more people said, yeah, I could present this as a narrative, that would be really interesting that, that then that would be a success.

12:02 - People naturally tell you stories if you interview them. I just did some, a couple of interviews, about something completely different about, what, whether lecturers wear suits to work when they're lecturing. I just happened to be doing an interview and, and the best bits of the interview is when the interviewee who was asking about this, starts telling me stories, funny stories about, you know, where he used to work and, and, the students, it was eight o'clock in the morning,

12:36 - an early start, and he said, some of the students used to come in pajamas and I was wearing a suit. You know, so people tell you stories. and so yeah, management is, is a good, almost anything is lends itself to stories. It, it is whether storytelling is seen as a legit, legitimate way to make a point. And in academic journals, it tends not to be so legitimate. So what I've been trying to do is to write stuff that

13:10 - legitimates more history and reflecting on how to write it, makes it less, yeah, hopefully makes it more reputable as a, as a a format. You know, you're always gonna have people who know I say, no, no, no, it is gotta be, it's gotta look scientific. And, you know, you gotta have analysis and preferably quants, and that's all fine. But I think there's a space for storytelling, a turn in an academic field.

13:45 - It's never a turn where everyone turns in one direction. It's a tendency, I I suppose you could call it a historical tendency in management. well, I think this book, as I'm, as I'm trying to plug obviously is, is in many ways the culmination of this, historic term, historical methods for management. I'm, I'm really pleased that, I mean, I know, I know these three authors, the, the editors, obviously Stephanie Decker is one of my co-authors.

14:18 - And, so hopefully this is a kind of the culmination of it, but it's obviously more diffused now when it started, when we published this paper 20 years ago, it took a long time to get any acceptance. I think one, other people independently have come to the sort of similar i, conclusion, especially a group in, well, the group that Bill Foster is involved with. And one of the concepts that they came up with was, rhetorical history, which is looking at how

14:57 - organizations actually use their past in the pres in the present to legitimate themselves and also historic corporate social responsibility. How companies are increasingly being asked to be responsible for everything that happens in their value chains. You know, for example, they have the modern slavery statement on many corporate websites to say, look, we've looked through the value chain and far as we, as far as we can make out there,

15:28 - there's no forced labor in any of our supply chain, which is great. but increasingly companies are being asked to say, what about in your past? have you always, and and obviously many organizations discover things in their past that they wouldn't do now, or they might wish they, they hadn't done. And it's how, how they decide to maybe come clean about that or present it.

16:01 - so these concepts of rhetorical history, how companies use history strategically, obviously organizations are a product of their past in the way that they do things, that, the routines that they have, the different ways that they innovate, but they can also have exercise, some control an agency about how they present their past in order to legitimate themselves in the present. So that's concept of rhetorical history, which is,

16:31 - which has really taken off, which I would say is in parallel with the historic term, which I've been talking about. And this concept of historic corporate social responsibility is increasingly relevant recently because of the Black Lives Matter. so last week, I took a group of students to, the Bank of England and the Bank of England has a special exhibition in their museum about the bank and slavery. so that's the Bank of England coming to terms with

17:10 - what's a, could be perceived as a difficult past. I'm hoping that the, that the book will facilitate people who are publishing, historical stuff, will allow them to make it even easier for them to get published in management journals. I, I think there's been a, a big change that journals, academic journals are much more receptive to this kind of material. I hope coming out of the research that I'm doing on, internal communication, I hope that we can come up with some

17:48 - helpful suggestions for organizations as how, how to deal with the past. We, we can look at examples of organizations that have dealt with it better perhaps than others, and try to draw out the lessons and say to organizations, well, if you're thinking about, and they're already consultants who, there's a big consulting, not big consulting industry, but there is a consultancy industry. There's a company, the History Factory,

18:15 - which will advise organizations how to deal with their past and archivists, are interested in this. So I think we'd like to be part of that more practical debate as well as the academic debates. So the academic debates about getting more historical stuff published in academic journals. But alongside that, I hope that we can have a discussion of, well what about the internal communications as a profession and archivist who working companies as a profession, how they can, raise their profile

18:49 - and have discussions with academics about how to improve communication in organizations. That would be brilliant.

Faculti AI can make mistakes