Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T17:41:21.516Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

“Varieties of Capitalism” Roundtable

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 April 2011

Mira Wilkins ,
Kathleen Thelen ,
Richard Whitley ,
Rory M. Miller ,
Cathie Jo Martin ,
V. R. Berghahn ,
Martin Jes Iversen ,
Gary Herrigel  and
Jonathan Zeitlin
Mira Wilkins
Affiliation:
Florida International University
Kathleen Thelen
Affiliation:
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Richard Whitley
Affiliation:
Manchester Business School, University of Manchester
Rory M. Miller
Affiliation:
University of Liverpool Management School
Cathie Jo Martin
Affiliation:
Boston University
V. R. Berghahn
Affiliation:
Columbia University
Martin Jes Iversen
Affiliation:
Centre for Business History, Copenhagen Business School
Gary Herrigel
Affiliation:
University of Chicago
Jonathan Zeitlin
Affiliation:
University of Amsterdam
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The debate about the idea of “varieties of capitalism,” which was formalized by Peter Hall and David Soskice in their 2001 book on the subject, has attracted the work of business historians, as well as of political scientists, and economists.

Type
Articles
Information
Business History Review , Volume 84 , Issue 4: Business History and Varieties of Capitalism , Winter 2010 , pp. 637 - 674
Copyright
Copyright © The President and Fellows of Harvard College 2010

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 Hall, Peter and Soskice, David, eds., Varieties of Capitalism: The Institutional Foundations of Comparative Advantage (Oxford, 2001).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

2 Most of the literature made such comparisons implicitly. A number of infl uential works, such as Kennedy, William P., Industrial Structure Capital Markets and the Origins of British Economic Decline (Cambridge, U.K., 1987), made them more formally.Google Scholar

3 This goes back to at least Cameron, Rondo, Banking in the Early Stages of Industrialization (Oxford, 1967)Google Scholar. A more recent study is by Cassis, Youseff, ed., Finance and Financiers in European History, 1880–1960 (Cambridge, U.K., 2002).Google Scholar

4 Chandler, Alfred D. Jr. with the assistance of Takashi Hikino, Scale and Scope: The Dynamics of Industrial Capitalism (Cambridge, Mass., 1990).Google Scholar

5 McCraw, Thomas K., ed., Creating Modern Capitalism: How Entrepreneurs, Companies, and Countries Triumphed in Three Industrial Revolutions (Cambridge, Mass., 1997).Google Scholar

6 Hall and Soskice, Varieties of Capitalism.

7 The phrase came from the title of Childs, Marquis W., Sweden: The Middle Way (New Haven, 1938). This popular book was reprinted in the 1960s.Google Scholar

8 Stewart, Charles F. and Simmons, George B., A Bibliography of International Business (New York, 1964), 1–124, with the quoted passage on p. 4. Of course, they were wrong. The Soviet system did allow for certain private enterprise, long before its collapse. But that was another matter.Google Scholar

9 Indeed, one did not have to be an advocate of the free markets (or to look at the matter retrospectively) to fi nd the Stewart-Simmons comment somewhat “quaint.” In the 1960s, as an example, when foreign banks were considering investing in the United States and trying to fi gure out the complexities of American state and national policies on bank regulations, they found a total absence of “laissez-faire”—at least in the banking sector.

10 Bremmer, Ian, The End of the Free Market: Who Wins the War between States and Corporations (New York, 2010). See also reviews of the book in the Economist, 5 June 2010, and the New York Times, 6 June 2010.Google Scholar

11 It is the convention for students of multinational enterprise to use the terms “home” as the country where the multinational is headquartered and “host” as the country that hosts the activities of the foreign-owned multinational (the locale where the latter does business abroad).

12 Wilkins, Mira, “The History of the Multinational Enterprise,” in The Oxford Handbook of International Business, ed. Rugman, Alan M. (Oxford, 2nd ed., 2009), 3–38, esp. 16–17Google Scholar; and Jones, Geoffrey, Multinationals and Global Capitalism from the Nineteenth to the Twenty-first Century (Oxford, 2005), 16–17.Google Scholar

13 See, for example, Sombart, Werner, “Capitalism,” in Encyclopedia of Social Sciences, vol.3 (New York, 1930), 195–208Google Scholar; Schumpeter, Joseph A., Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy (New York, 1942)Google Scholar; Posner, Richard A., The Crisis of Capitalist Democracy (Cambridge, Mass., 2010)Google Scholar; and Appleby, Joyce, The Relentless Revolution: A History of Capitalism (New York, 2010).Google Scholar

14 Note the formidable literature on “religion and capitalism” and “democracy and capitalism.” Among the ongoing contributions in the last few years are McCleary, Rachel M. and Barro, Robert J., “Religion and Economy,” Journal of Economic Perspectives 20, no. 2 (2006): 49–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Acemoglu, Daron, Robinson, James, and Yared, Pierre, “Income and Democracy,” American Economic Review 98, no. 3 (2008): 808–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

15 A “family firm” may (and frequently does) have outside-the-family (or families) shareholders. Often “state-owned” businesses are not 100 percent owned by the state. Publicly traded fi rms can be family dominated or have partial state ownership.

16 There are problems in defi ning what constitutes the multinational enterprise, which I have explored elsewhere. See Wilkins, Mira, “Defi ning a Firm: History and Theory,” in Multinationals: Theory and History, ed. Hertner, Peter and Jones, Geoffrey (Aldershot, 1986), 80–95.Google Scholar

17 My defi nition is broad enough to encompass a fi rm that operates in a single foreign country, which was often the case as I traced the beginnings of the history of individual multinational enterprises.

18 These linkages vary by circumstances, industries, and history. I do not see joint ventures as a “magic bullet” to provide for transfer and absorption; in fact, at times they are counterproductive to the process. Yet they can be part of the transfer process. Sometimes, a multinational enterprise's presence within a particular host country can be so small as to have minimal external linkages.

19 I have explored some of these ideas in more detail in my books and in different contexts in articles. On the latter, see, for instance, Wilkins, Mira, “The Role of Private Business in the International Diffusion of Technology,” Journal of Economic History 34 (Mar. 1974): 166–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Wilkins, Mira, “The Contributions of Foreign Business to Japanese Economic Development,” in Foreign Business in Japan before World War II, ed. Yuzawa, Takeshi and Udagawa, Masaru (Tokyo, 1990), 35–57Google Scholar, and “Response” to comment in the latter, 59–60; and Wilkins, Mira, “Multinational Enterprises and Economic Change,” in Australian Economic History Review 38, no. 2 (1998): 103–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

20 The fi rst generation Saudi engineers, technicians, and managers were all trained within the context of the multinational enterprise that operated in that country.

21 This may happen through acquisitions, but often happens through the course of time as subsidiaries develop their own activities and expertise.

22 Abo has discussed this model in a number of different contexts. See, for example, Abo, Tetsuo, ed., Hybrid Factory: The Japanese Production System in the United States (Oxford, 1994).Google Scholar

23 For a thoughtful article on the impact of computer-mediated transactions and combinatorial innovation, see Varian, Hal R., “Computer Mediated Transactions,” American Economic Review 100 (May 2010): 1–10. Varian believes that “one interesting implication of computer mediated transactions among knowledge workers is that interactions are no longer constrained by time or distance” (p. 8). I disagree: time zones plus language and understanding constraints do persist, speed in communications notwithstanding.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

24 If multinationals are taxed by a corrupt government, the revenues are clearly not used in the “most advantageous” manner for a national economy.

25 Can the presence of multinationals bring negative externalities? Of course. My argument is, however, that a careful study of the historical record shows far more desirable outcomes than adverse ones.

26 Including but not limited to coordinated collective bargaining, arrangements for worker participation and voice at the plant level, coordinated systems of vocational education and training, and particular kinds of financial institutions.

27 Streeck, Wolfgang, Re-forming Capitalism: Institutional Change in the German Political Economy (Oxford, 2009).Google Scholar

28 Hall, Peter A. and Gingerich, Daniel, “Spielarten des Kapitalismus und institutionelle Komplementaritäten in der Makroökonomie: Eine empirische Analyse,” Berliner Journal für Soziologie (Winter 2004).Google Scholar

29 See, for example, Iversen, Torben and Soskice, David, “Distribution and Redistribution: The Shadow from the Nineteenth Century,” World Politics (2009): 438–86;Google ScholarKitschelt, Herbert et al., “Convergence and Divergence in Advanced Capitalist Democracies,” in Continuity and Change in Contemporary Capitalism, ed. Kitschelt, Herbert et al. (New York, 1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Swenson, Peter, Capitalists Against Markets (New York, 2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Thelen, Kathleen, How Institutions Evolve: The Political Economy of Skills in Comparative-Historical Perspective (New York, 2004); Cathie Jo Martin and Duane Swank, In Search of Self (Boston University, unpublished manuscript).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

30 Swenson, Capitalists Against Markets; Mares, Isabela, “The Sources of Business Interest in Social Insurance,” World Politics 55, no. 2 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Martin, Cathie Jo, Stuck in Neutral: Business and the Politics of Human Capital Investment Policy (Princeton, 2000).Google Scholar

31 Swenson, Capitalists Against Markets; Thelen, How Institutions Evolve.

32 Djelic, Marie-Laure, Exporting the American Model: The Postwar Transformation of European Business (Oxford, 1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Ranieri, Ruggero, “Remodelling the Italian Steel Industry: Americanization, Modernization and Mass Production,” in Americanization and Its Limits: Reworking U.S. Technology and Management in Postwar Europe and Japan, ed. Zeitlin, Jonathan and Herrigel, Gary (Oxford, 2000), 236–68; Jonathan Zeitlin, “Americanizing British Engineering? Strategic Debate, Selective Adaptation, and Hybrid Innovation in Postwar Reconstruction,” in Americanization and Its Limits, 123–52.Google Scholar

33 Johnson, Chalmers, MITI and the Japanese Miracle (Stanford, 1982)Google Scholar; Zysman, John, Governments, Markets and Growth: Financial Systems and the Politics of Industrial Change (Ithaca, N.Y., 1983).Google Scholar

34 Peter Hall and David Soskice, “An Introduction to Varieties of Capitalism,” in Varieties of Capitalism, 37.

35 Streeck, Wolfgang, Social Institutions and Economic Performance: Studies of Industrial Relations in Advanced Capitalist Economies (London, 1992).Google Scholar

36 Casper, Steven and Whitley, Richard, “Managing Competences in Entrepreneurial Technology Firms: A Comparative Institutional Analysis of Germany, Sweden, and the U.K.,” Research Policy 33 (2004): 89–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

37 Amable, Bruno, The Diversity of Modern Capitalism (Oxford, 2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Whitley, Richard, Business Systems and Organisational Capabilities: The Institutional Structuring of Competitive Competences (Oxford, 2007).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

38 Braczyk, Hans-Joachim, Cooke, Philip, and Heidenreich, Martin, eds., Regional Innovation Systems: The Role of Governances in a Globalized World (London, 1998; republ. 2003)Google Scholar; Saxenian, AnnaLee, Regional Advantage: Culture and Competition in Silicon Valley and Route 128 (Cambridge, Mass., 1994)Google Scholar; Allen, Matthew, “The Varieties of Capitalism Paradigm: Not Enough Variety?” Socio-Economic Review 2 (2004): 87–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Deeg, Richard and Jackson, Gregory, “Towards a More Dynamic Theory of Capitalist Variety,” Socio-Economic Review 5 (2007): 149–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Streeck, Wolfgang, Re-forming Capitalism (Oxford, 2009).Google Scholar

39 Crouch, Colin, Capitalist Diversity and Change: Recombinant Governance and Institutional Entrepreneurs (Oxford, 2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Streeck, Wolfgang and Thelen, Kathleen, eds., Beyond Continuity: Institutional Change in Advanced Political Economies (Oxford, 2005)Google Scholar; Morgan, Glenn, Whitley, Richard, and Moen, Eli, eds., Changing Capitalisms? Internationalisation, Institutional Change, and Systems of Economic Organisation (Oxford, 2005).Google Scholar

40 See the following by Whitley, Richard: Business Systems in East Asia: Firms, Markets and Societies (London, 1992)Google Scholar; Divergent Capitalisms: The Social Structuring and Change of Business Systems (Oxford, 1999)Google Scholar; and Business Systems and Organisational Capabilities (Oxford, 2007).Google Scholar

41 Kristensen, Peer Hull and Zeitlin, Jonathan, Local Players in Global Games: The Strategic Constitution of a Multinational Corporation (Oxford, 2005).Google Scholar

42 Zeitlin, Jonathan, “The Historical Alternatives Approach,” in The Oxford Handbook of Business History, ed. Jones, Geoffrey and Zeitlin, Jonathan (Oxford, 2008), 120–40.Google Scholar

43 Laurence, Henry, Money Rules: The New Politics of Finance in Britain and Japan (Ithaca, N.Y., 2001).Google Scholar

44 My thanks are due to Carlos Dávila, Stephanie Decker, and Raúl García Heras for their critical remarks on the fi rst draft of this essay. Unfortunately, for reasons of space, I have not been able to address all their comments.

45 Jones, Geoffrey and Zeitlin, Jonathan, eds., The Oxford Handbook of Business History (Oxford, 2008).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

46 Barbero, María Inés, “Business History in Latin America: A Historiographical Perspective,” Business History Review 82 (Autumn 2008): 572.Google Scholar

47 Schneider, Ben Ross, “Hierarchical Market Economies and Varieties of Capitalism in Latin America,” Journal of Latin American Studies 41 (Aug. 2009): 553–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

48 The latter points differentiate Latin America from emerging economies in Pacific Asia.

49 This comment is generalizing about the role of the state: during the ISI period there was a substantial degree of economic nationalism which was most evident in the nationalization of mining, energy and public utilities, the reservation of “basic industries” for stateowned enterprise (SOEs), and, at times, the enforced use of joint ventures between foreign and domestic business. Some of the SOEs remain important business leaders, such as, for example, Codelco, the Chilean copper-mining corporation, or Petrobras, the Brazilian state oil company.

50 Schneider, “Hierarchical Market Economies,” 555.

51 See, for example, Leff, Nathaniel, “Industrial Organization and Entrepreneurship in the Developing Countries: The Economic Groups,” Economic Development and Cultural Change 26 (July 1978): 661–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Guillén, Mauro, “Business Groups in Emerging Economies: A Resource-Based View,” Academy of Management Journal 43 (June 2000): 362–80.Google ScholarCerutti, Mario, ed., Empresas y grupos empresariales en América Latina, España, y Portugal (Monterrey, 2005)Google Scholar, contains six essays on Latin American groups. I completed this essay before seeing a copy of Colpan, Asli M., Hikino, Takashi, and Lincoln, James R., The Oxford Handbook of Business Groups (Oxford, 2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, which contains four chapters on individual Latin American countries (Argentina, Brazil, Chile, and Mexico).

52 For a rare example of a corporate history analyzing failure, see Rougier, Marcelo and Schvarzer, Jorge, Las grandes empresas no mueren de pie: El (o) caso de SIAM (Buenos Aires, 2006).Google Scholar

53 Some of the most important advances in business history in Latin America have been in banking and fi nance, but the focus, until recently, has been on the early part of the twentieth century: see Marichal, Carlos, “Banking History and Archives in Latin America,” Business History Review 82 (Autumn 2008): 585–602.Google Scholar

54 An exception is Brennan, James P., The Labor Wars in Córdoba, 1955–1976: Ideology, Work and Politics in an Argentine Industrial City (Cambridge, Mass., 1994)Google Scholar, which uses the archives of multinational automobile firms. For further comment on the ways in which “dependency theory” divided historians of business and labor, see Miller, Rory M., Foreign Firms and Business History in Latin America (Bogotá, 2010), ch. 1.Google Scholar

55 Cuervo-Cazurra, Alvaro, “The Multinationalization of Developing Country MNEs: The Case of the Multilatinas,” Journal of International Management 14 (June 2008): 138–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar For some case studies, see Lourdes Casanova and Matthew Fraser, eds., From Multilatinas to Global Latinas: The New Latin American Multinationals (Inter-American Development Bank, n.d.), on line at www.iadb.org/intal/intalcdi/PE/2009/03415.pdf.

56 For an Argentine exception, see Daniel Friel, “Applying the Varieties of Capitalism Approach to Argentina: Institutions and the Strategy of Arcor,” paper presented at the 2009 Congress of the Latin American Studies Association, on line at http://lasa.international.pitt. edu/members/congress-papers/lasa2009/fi les/FrielDaniel.pdf.

57 On Petrobras, for example, see Dantas, Eva and Bell, Martin, “Latecomer Firms and the Emergence and Development of Knowledge Networks: The Case of Petrobras in Brazil,” Research Policy 38 (June 2009): 829–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

58 The quotation is from Schneider, “Hierarchical Market Economies,” 555.

59 For a fascinating discussion of German economic development, see Dunlavy, Colleen and Welskopp, Thomas, “Peculiarities and Myths: Comparing U.S. and German Capitalism,” German Historical Institute Bulletin no. 41 (Fall 2007): 33–64.Google Scholar

60 Orren, Karen and Skowronek, Stephen, The Search for American Political Development (Cambridge, U.K., 2004).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

61 Martin, Cathie Jo and Swank, Duane, “The Political Origins of Coordinated Capitalism: Business Organization, Party Systems, and State Structure in the Age of Innocence,” American Political Science Review 102, no. 2 (2008): 181–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

62 Martin, Cathie Jo, “Sectional Parties, Divided Business,” Studies in American Political Development 20, no. 2 (2006).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

63 Martin and Swank, “The Political Origins of Coordinated Capitalism.”

64 Ibid., 182.

65 Chandler, Alfred D. Jr., “Business History as Institutional History,” in Approaches to American Economic History, ed. Taylor, George Rogers and Ellsworth, Lucius F. (Charlottesville, Va., 1971).Google Scholar

66 Hall and Soskice, Varieties of Capitalism. The extensive VoC literature illustrates this, and a search for “Varieties” and “Capitalism” in EBSCOHost results in 283 academic peerr eviewed articles.

67 Hancké, Bob, Rhodes, Martin, and Thatcher, Mark, “Beyond Varieties of Capitalism,” in Debating Varieties of Capitalism: A Reader, ed. Hancké, Bob (Oxford, 2009), 273–301.Google Scholar

68 Chandler, AlfredD. Jr., Strategy and Structure: Chapters in the History of the American Industrial Enterprise (Cambridge, 1962)Google Scholar, Hall and Soskice, Varieties of Capitalism, 15.

69 Ibid.

70 Fellman, Susanna et al., eds., Creating Nordic Capitalism: The Business History of a Competitive Periphery (Basingstoke, 2008).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

71 Peter Hall and Kathleen Thelen, “Institutional Change in Varieties of Capitalism,” in Debating Varieties of Capitalism, 273–300.

72 Karlsson, Svenolof and Lugn, Anders, Changing the World: The Story of Lars Magnus Ericsson and His Successors (Stockholm, 2010).Google Scholar

73 Herrigel, Gary, Manufacturing Possibilities: Creative Action and Industrial Recomposition in the United States, Germany and France (Oxford, 2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Herrmann, Andrea, “Rethinking the Link between Labour Market Flexibility and Corporate Competitiveness: A Critique of the Institutionalist Literature,” Socio-Economic Review 6 (2008): 637–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Lange, Knut, “Institutional Embeddedness and the Strategic Leeway of Actors: The Case of the German Therapeutical Biotech Industry,” Socio-Economic Review 7 (2009): 181–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Lorenz, Edward, “The Varieties of Capitalism Hypothesis about Labour Markets, Skills and Innovation: What's Right with It and What's Wrong with It,” unpublished manuscript, University of Nice, 2010.Google Scholar

74 See, above all, Crouch, Capitalist Diversity and Change.

75 Howell, Chris, “Varieties of Capitalism: And Then There Was One?” Comparative Politics 36, no. 1 (2003): 103–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hancké, Bob, Rhodes, Martin, and Thatcher, Mark, “Introduction: Beyond Varieties of Capitalism,” in Beyond Varieties of Capitalism: Confl icts, Contradictions, and Complementarities in the European Economy, ed. Hancké, , Rhodes, , and Thatcher, (Oxford, 2007).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

76 Herrigel, Manufacturing Possibilities.

77 Hall, Peter A. and Gingerich, Daniel W., “Varieties of Capitalism and Institutional Complementarities in the Macroeconomy: An Empirical Analysis,” MPIfG Discussion Paper 04/5 (Cologne, 2004)Google Scholar; Martin Rhodes and Oscar Molina, “The Political Economy of Adjustment in Mixed Market Economies: A Study of Spain and Italy,” in Beyond Varieties of Capitalism, 223–52; Amable, The Diversity of Modern Capitalism; Schneider, “Hierarchical Market Economies.”

78 Crouch, Capitalist Diversity and Change. Proponents of VoC typically claim that national political economies more closely resembling the pure types (CMEs, LMEs) perform better than mixed models, precisely because of institutional complementarities (see Hall and Gingerich). But the empirical evidence does not support this view, since many of the most successful national political economies over the past two decades look more like “mongrels” or “hybrids” than pure types. See Kenworthy, Lane, “Institutional Coherence and Macroeconomic Performance,” Socio-Economic Review 4, no. 1 (2006): 69–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Zeitlin, Jonathan, “Introduction: Governing Work and Welfare in a New Economy: European and American Experiments,” in Governing Work and Welfare in a New Economy: European and American Experiments, ed. Zeitlin, Jonathan and Trubek, David M. (Oxford, 2003), 1–30.Google Scholar

79 Hall, Peter and Thelen, Kathleen, “Institutional Change in Varieties of Capitalism,” in Socio-Economic Review 7 (2009): 7–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

80 Wolfgang Streeck and Kathleen Thelen, “Introduction: Institutional Change in Advanced Political Economies,” in Beyond Continuity, 1–39; Hall and Thelen, “Institutional Change in Varieties of Capitalism”; Mahoney, James and Thelen, Kathleen, “A Theory of Gradual Institutional Change,” in Explaining Institutional Change: Ambiguity, Agency, and Power, ed. Mahoney, and Thelen, (New York, 2010), 1–37Google Scholar; Streeck, Re-forming Capitalism; Herrigel, Manufacturing Possibilities.

81 Streeck and Thelen, “Introduction: Institutional Change in Advanced Political Economies”; Mayntz, Renate, “Systemkohärenz, institutionelle Komplementarität und institutioneller Wandel,” in Transformationen des Kapitalismus: Festschrift für Wolfgang Streeck zum sechzigsten Geburtstag, ed. Beckert, Jens, et al. (Frankfurt, 2006), 381–98Google Scholar; Hall and Thelen, “Institutional Change in Varieties of Capitalism”; Streeck, Re-forming Capitalism; Thelen, Kathleen, “Presidential Address: Economic Regulation and Social Solidarity: Conceptual and Analytic Innovations in the Study of Advanced Capitalism,” Socio-Economic Review 8 (2010): 187–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

82 Gary Herrigel, “Institutionalists at the Limits of Institutionalism: A Critique of Two Books on Germany and Japan,” Symposium, Special on “Non-Liberal Capitalism” in Socioeconomic Review 3, no. 3 (2005): 559–67Google Scholar; Zeitlin, “Introduction: Governing Work and Welfare in a New Economy”; Jonathan Zeitlin, “Industrial Districts and Regional Clusters,” in Oxford Handbook of Business History, 219–43; Jackson, Gregory and Deeg, Richard, “From Comparing Capitalisms to the Politics of Institutional Change,” Review of International Political Economy 15, no. 4 (2008): 680–709CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Schneiberg, Marc, “What's on the Path? Path Dependence, Organizational Diversity and the Problem of Institutional Change in the U.S. Economy, 1900–1950,” Socio-Economic Review 5 (2007): 47–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Berk, Gerald and Schneiberg, Marc, “Varieties in Capitalism, Varieties of Association: Collaborative Learning in American Industry, 1900 to 1925,” Politics and Society 1 (2005): 46–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

83 Gary Herrigel, “Corporate Governance,” in The Oxford Handbook of Business History, 470–500.

84 Compare Herrigel, Manufacturing Possibilities, to Zeitlin, Jonathan, “Shop Floor Bargaining and the State: A Contradictory Relationship,” in Shop Floor Bargaining and the State: Historical and Comparative Perspectives, ed. Tolliday, Steven and Zeitlin, Jonathan (Cambridge, U.K., 1985), 1–45.Google Scholar

85 Dewey, John, Human Nature and Conduct (1922)Google Scholar, repr. in Dewey, John, The Middle Works, 1899–1924, vol.14, ed. Boydston, Jo Ann (Carbondale, 1983)Google Scholar; Joas, Hans, The Creativity of Action (Chicago, 1996)Google Scholar; Sabel, Charles F., “A Real Time Revolution in Routines,” in The Firm as a Collaborative Community: Reconstructing Trust in the Knowledge Economy, ed. Heckscher, Charles and Adler, Paul (Oxford, 2007), 106–56.Google Scholar

86 See Sabel, Charles F. and Zeitlin, Jonathan: “Stories, Strategies, Structures: Rethinking Historical Alternatives to Mass Production,” in Worlds of Possibility: Flexibility and Mass Production in Western Industrialization, ed. Sabel, and Zeitlin, (Cambridge, U.K., 1997), 1–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and “Neither Modularity nor Relational Contracting: Inter-Firm Contracting in the New Economy,” Enterprise and Society 5, no. 3 (2005): 388–403Google Scholar; Zeitlin: “The Historical Alternatives Approach” and “Industrial Districts and Regional Clusters”; Herrigel, Gary: Industrial Constructions: The Sources of German Industrial Power (New York, 1996)Google Scholar, and “Corporate Governance”; Berk, Gerald: Alternative Tracks: The Constitution of American Industrial Order, 1865–1917 (Baltimore, 1997)Google Scholar, and Louis D. Brandeis and the Making of Regulated Competition, 1900–1932 (New York, 2010)Google Scholar; and Scranton, Philip, Endless Novelty: Specialty Production and American Industrialization, 1865–1925 (Princeton, 1997).Google Scholar