β-amyloid plaques:Stages in life history or independent origin?

Several types of discrete β-amyloid (Aβ) deposit or senile plaque have been identified in the brains of individuals with Alzheimer's disease and Down's syndrome. The majority of these plaques can be classified into four morphological types: diffuse, primitive, classic and compact. Two hypotheses have been proposed to account for these plaques. Firstly, that the diffuse, primitive, classic and compact plaques develop in sequence and represent stages in the life history of a single plaque type. Secondly, that the different Aβ plaques develop independently and therefore, unique factors are involved in the formation of each type. To attempt to distinguish between these hypotheses, the morphology, ultrastructure, composition, and spatial distribution in the brain of the four types of plaque were compared. Although some primitive plaques may develop from diffuse plaques, the evidence suggests that a unique combination of factors is involved in the pathogenesis of each plaque type and, therefore, supports the hypothesis that the major types of Aβ plaque develop independently.

What to expect after the honeymoon:testing a life cycle theory of franchise relationships

This research examines the evolution of interorganizational relationships in a franchising context. Using U-curve theory, we develop three hypotheses and contrast them with traditional lifecycle theory. Three groups of constructs are affected by lifecycle: cooperation variables, dependence variables, and relationship variables. Four distinct stages emerge, with highest levels of variables in the honeymoon stage, lower levels in routine and crossroad stages, and increasing levels in the stabilization stage. Franchisors should strive for “stability on high levels” before operational realities influence the franchisees. Franchisees’ intermediate lifecycle phases are most critical for the system, since opportunistic behavior and switching are most likely.

Organizations in time:history, theory, methods

Book review: Organizations in Time, edited by R Daniel Wadhwani and Marcelo Bucheli, Oxford University Press, 2014. The title of this edited volume is slightly misleading, as its various contributions explore the potential for more historical analysis in organization studies rather than addressing issues associated with time and organizing. Hopefully this will not distract from the important achievement of this volume—important especially for business historians—in further expanding and integrating business history into management and organization studies. The various contributions, elegantly tied together by R. Daniel Wadhwani and Marcelo Bucheli in their substantial introduction (which, by the way, presents a significant contribution in its own right), opens up new sets of questions, especially in terms of future methodological and theoretical developments in the field. This book also reflects the changing institutional location of business historians, who increasingly make their careers in business schools rather than history departments, especially in Europe, reopening old questions of history as a social science. There have been several calls to teach more history in business education, such as the Carnegie Foundation report (2011) that found undergraduate business education too narrow in focus and highlighted the need to integrate more liberal arts teaching into the curriculum. However, in the contemporary research-driven environment of business and management schools, historical understanding is unlikely to permeate the curriculum if historical analysis cannot first deliver significant theoretical contributions. This is the central theme around which this edited volume revolves, and it marks a milestone in this ongoing debate. (In the spirit of full disclosure, I should add that even though I did not contribute to this volume, I have coauthored with several of its contributors and view this book as central to my current research practice.)