企业失败的偶然性:以卢卡斯工业为例

IF 0.8 4区管理学 Q1 HISTORY

Management & Organizational History Pub Date : 2018-07-03 DOI:10.1080/17449359.2018.1534597

P. Edwards

{"title":"企业失败的偶然性:以卢卡斯工业为例","authors":"P. Edwards","doi":"10.1080/17449359.2018.1534597","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Most accounts of corporate failure offer explanation in terms of fundamental changes in the environment or strategic inertia. The case of Lucas Industries is different: a firm that was actively restructuring itself but still lost its 100-year-old identity in 1996 as a result of a merger. The firm actively pursued the merger but found that the smaller merger partner in fact became dominant. Comparative analysis with other firms, together with interrogation of the results of three studies of the firm over the period 1978–95, points to a threefold explanation: (1) some weaknesses in the restructuring strategy which were brought into focus by (2) an economic downturn and belief at the time in the rationalization of the industry into fewer firms and amplified by (3) some specific contingencies in parts of the firm. The analytical lesson is that failure can be more historically contingent than extant accounts recognize. The practical one is to urge more independent scrutiny of the decisions of company boards.","PeriodicalId":45724,"journal":{"name":"Management & Organizational History","volume":"13 1","pages":"220 - 235"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2018-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17449359.2018.1534597","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The contingencies of corporate failure: the case of Lucas industries\",\"authors\":\"P. Edwards\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/17449359.2018.1534597\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Most accounts of corporate failure offer explanation in terms of fundamental changes in the environment or strategic inertia. The case of Lucas Industries is different: a firm that was actively restructuring itself but still lost its 100-year-old identity in 1996 as a result of a merger. The firm actively pursued the merger but found that the smaller merger partner in fact became dominant. Comparative analysis with other firms, together with interrogation of the results of three studies of the firm over the period 1978–95, points to a threefold explanation: (1) some weaknesses in the restructuring strategy which were brought into focus by (2) an economic downturn and belief at the time in the rationalization of the industry into fewer firms and amplified by (3) some specific contingencies in parts of the firm. The analytical lesson is that failure can be more historically contingent than extant accounts recognize. The practical one is to urge more independent scrutiny of the decisions of company boards.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45724,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Management & Organizational History\",\"volume\":\"13 1\",\"pages\":\"220 - 235\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-07-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17449359.2018.1534597\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Management & Organizational History\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/17449359.2018.1534597\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Management & Organizational History","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17449359.2018.1534597","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 3

摘要

大多数关于企业失败的解释都是基于环境的根本变化或战略惯性。卢卡斯工业的情况则不同:这家公司正在积极地进行自我重组，但由于1996年的一次合并，它仍然失去了百年历史的身份。该公司积极寻求合并，但发现较小的合并伙伴实际上占据了主导地位。与其他公司的比较分析，以及对该公司在1978 - 1995年期间的三项研究结果的询问，指出了一个三重解释:(1)重组战略中的一些弱点，这些弱点被(2)经济衰退和当时对行业合理化的信念所关注，并被(3)公司部分的一些特定突发事件所放大。分析的教训是，失败在历史上的偶然性可能比现存的描述所认识到的更大。实际的做法是敦促对公司董事会的决定进行更独立的审查。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

The contingencies of corporate failure: the case of Lucas industries

ABSTRACT Most accounts of corporate failure offer explanation in terms of fundamental changes in the environment or strategic inertia. The case of Lucas Industries is different: a firm that was actively restructuring itself but still lost its 100-year-old identity in 1996 as a result of a merger. The firm actively pursued the merger but found that the smaller merger partner in fact became dominant. Comparative analysis with other firms, together with interrogation of the results of three studies of the firm over the period 1978–95, points to a threefold explanation: (1) some weaknesses in the restructuring strategy which were brought into focus by (2) an economic downturn and belief at the time in the rationalization of the industry into fewer firms and amplified by (3) some specific contingencies in parts of the firm. The analytical lesson is that failure can be more historically contingent than extant accounts recognize. The practical one is to urge more independent scrutiny of the decisions of company boards.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Management & Organizational History Multiple-

CiteScore

1.10

自引率

16.70%

发文量

期刊介绍： Management & Organizational History (M&OH) is a quarterly, peer-reviewed journal that aims to publish high quality, original, academic research concerning historical approaches to the study of management, organizations and organizing. The journal addresses issues from all areas of management, organization studies, and related fields. The unifying theme of M&OH is its historical orientation. The journal is both empirical and theoretical. It seeks to advance innovative historical methods. It facilitates interdisciplinary dialogue, especially between business and management history and organization theory. The ethos of M&OH is reflective, ethical, imaginative, critical, inter-disciplinary, and international, as well as historical in orientation.