Editorial and note on the writing of management history

Abstract

If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information. About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.comEmerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation. AbstractPurpose -The aim of this study is to outline principles for the writing of management history. First, it is argued that if management history is to advance, pessimism of both purpose and intellect must be dispelled. Authors must bring with them a sense of how their research leads to better organisations, institutions, workplaces, economies and social relationships. Second, it holds that the utilisation of the scientific method, based around the testing of research theses, drawn from our existing knowledge and contributing to that knowledge, is management history's methodological bedrock. Design/methodology/approach -Much opposition to scientific methods in historical research, most notably from postmodernists and poststructuralists, is based on false premises. Drawing on Poincare's La Science et L'Hypothese (1902), this paper notes that there are no fundamental differences between research in the natural and historical sciences. All studies are conditional. Findings -This editorial recommends five steps in writing management history. First, know how your sources were put together, by whom, for what purposes, what they sought to record and what they did not. Second, use multiple sources. Third, keep your research questions in mind, modifying them as evidence demands. As E.H. Carr observed, research theses are "the indispensable tools of thought". Fourth, understand the social, intellectual and economic contexts of the study. Context is the key to understanding change. The more severe the restraint on change, the more significant is any change that breaks these bonds. Finally, use numbers as numbers count in history. While statistics must be subordinate to the theses, they allow more complex stories, be they of a society or micro-events within a firm. Originality/value -The growth of postmodernist and poststructuralist research paradigms has created uncertainty with regards to both methods and purpose among management and business historians. This editorial includes a defence of the values of empirically based scientific research.

“In spite of everything?” Female entrepreneurship from a historical perspective

“…One must bear in mind Bowden’s (2016) strictures on the nature and limitations of sources as well as the elements in a process of a historical research laid out by Previts et al (1990b). Therefore, we note that some publications are more focused on the story rather than the application of a correct method.…”

“…The analysis of the impact of contextual factors is, of course, central in the study of every entrepreneurial experience (Bowden, 2016). However, in the case of female-directed and female-owned businesses, this becomes essential, because of the additional constraints and restrictions that every woman experienced in her business.…”

Contextual analysis and newspaper archives in management history research

“…they also operated as industry journals for finance in this period". Indeed, in a Journal of Management History (JoMH) editorial note, Bowden (2016) argues that researchers need to know their sources; understand the historical context of the events and people involved; and use multiple sources to cross match evidence. The use of multiple sources enables authors to avoid the potential bias of depending upon only one source to represent press opinion of the time.…”

Accounting for management and organizational history: strategies and conceptions

“…Behind the illusion of a unified field, though, there has been a significant struggle to define, and at times defend, the contours of historical research on business and organizations (Bowden, 2016; Van Lent and Durepos, 2019). This type of angst is not new.…”