Beyond the formal/informal economy binary hierarchy

Purpose – This paper aims to evaluate critically the conventional binary hierarchical representation of the formal/informal economy dualism which reads informal employment as a residual and marginal sphere that has largely negative consequences for economic development and needs to be deterred. Design/methodology/approach – To contest this depiction, the results of 600 household interviews conducted in Ukraine during 2005/2006 on the extent and nature of their informal employment are reported. Findings – Informal employment is revealed to be an extensively used form of work and, through a richer and more textured understanding of the multiple roles that different forms of informal employment play, a form of work that positively contributes to economic and social development, acting both as an important seedbed for enterprise creation and development and as a primary vehicle through which community self-help is delivered in contemporary Ukraine. Research limitations/implications – This survey reveals that depicting informal employment as a hindrance to development and deterring engagement in this sphere results in state authorities destroying the entrepreneurial endeavour and active citizenship that other public policies are seeking to nurture. The paper concludes by addressing how this public policy paradox might start to be resolved. Originality/value – This paper is one of the first to document the role of informal employment in nurturing enterprise creation and development as well as community exchange.

Research strategies for organizational history:a dialogue between historical theory and organization theory

If history matters for organization theory, then we need greater reflexivity regarding the epistemological problem of representing the past; otherwise, history might be seen as merely a repository of ready-made data. To facilitate this reflexivity, we set out three epistemological dualisms derived from historical theory to explain the relationship between history and organization theory: (1) in the dualism of explanation, historians are preoccupied with narrative construction, whereas organization theorists subordinate narrative to analysis; (2) in the dualism of evidence, historians use verifiable documentary sources, whereas organization theorists prefer constructed data; and (3) in the dualism of temporality, historians construct their own periodization, whereas organization theorists treat time as constant for chronology. These three dualisms underpin our explication of four alternative research strategies for organizational history: corporate history, consisting of a holistic, objectivist narrative of a corporate entity; analytically structured history, narrating theoretically conceptualized structures and events; serial history, using replicable techniques to analyze repeatable facts; and ethnographic history, reading documentary sources "against the grain." Ultimately, we argue that our epistemological dualisms will enable organization theorists to justify their theoretical stance in relation to a range of strategies in organizational history, including narratives constructed from documentary sources found in organizational archives. Copyright of the Academy of Management, all rights reserved.