Sombartin ja Weberin kiista ei ratkea

Kirjallisuusarvostelu

Turvavaltio + postfordismi = kapitalismin uusi ilme

Kirjallisuusarvostelu

Minuus tavarana

Kirjallisuusarvostelu

Family ownership – a source of sustainable success in listed companies

Extant research on exchange-listed firms has acknowledged that the concentration of ownership and the identity of owners make a difference. In addition, studies indicate that firms with a dominant owner outperform firms with dispersed ownership. During the last few years, scholars have identified one group of owners, in particular, whose ownership stake in publicly listed firm is positively related to performance: the business family. While acknowledging that family firms represent a unique organizational form, scholars have identified various concepts and theories in order to understand how the family influences organizational processes and firm performance. Despite multitude of research, scholars have not been able to present clear results on how firm performance is actually impacted by the family. In other words, studies comparing the performance of listed family and other types of firms have remained descriptive in nature since they lack empirical data and confirmation from the family business representatives. What seems to be missing is a convincing theory that links the involvement and behavioral consequences. Accordingly, scholars have not yet come to a mutual understanding of what precisely constitutes a family business. The variety of different definitions and theories has made comparability of different results difficult for instance. These two issues have hampered the development of a rigorous theory of family business. The overall objective of this study is to describe and understand how the family as a dominant owner can enhance firm performance, and can act a source of sustainable success in listed companies. In more detail, in order to develop understanding of the unique factors that can act as competitive advantages for listed family firms, this study is based on a qualitative approach and aims at theory development, not theory verification. The data in this study consist of 16 thematic interviews with CEOs, members of the board, supervisory board chairs, and founders of Finnish listed-family firms. The study consists of two parts. The first part introduces the research topic, research paradigm, methods, and publications, and also discusses the overall outcomes and contributions of the publications. The second part consists of four publications that address the research questions from different viewpoints. The analyses of this study indicate that family ownership in listed companies represents a structure that differs from the traditional views of agency and stewardship, as well as from resource-based and stakeholder views. As opposed to these theories and shareholder capitalism which consider humans as individualistic, opportunistic, and self-serving, and assume that the behaviors of an investor are based on the incentives and motivations to maximize private profits, the family owners form a collective social unit that is motivated to act together toward their mutual purpose or benefit. In addition, socio-emotional and psychological elements of ownership define the family members as owners, rather than the legal and financial dimensions of ownership. That is, collective psychological ownership of family over the business (F-CPO) can be seen as a construct that comprehensively captures the fusion between the family and the business. Moreover, it captures the realized, rather than merely potential, family influence on and interaction with the business, and thereby brings more theoretical clarity of the nature of the fusion between the family and the business, and offers a solution to the problem of family business definition. This doctoral dissertation provides academics, policy-makers, family business practitioners, and the society at large with many implications considering family and business relationships.

Affektitehdas. Työn rationalisoinnin historiallisia jatkumoita

Affektit, kapitalismi ja työn rationalisointi yhdistyvät toisiinsa erottamattomasti. Nykykeskusteluissa työstä ja työelämästä rationalisointi jaetaan usein tekniseen fordistiseen rationalisointiin ja sitä tunteellisempaan postfordistiseen rationalisointiin. Tämä tutkimus osoittaa, affektiivisen rationalisoinnin käsitteen kautta, että työn vanhat ja uudet tieteet asettuvat jatkumoon. Työn tieteissä tietoa työläisestä tuotetaan asettamalla ominaisuuksia aina uudelleen määriteltävään työläisen luokittuneeseen ja sukupuolittuneeseen affektiiviseen figuuriin. Tiedon tuottamisen näkökulmasta muun muassa tayloristiset työn tehostamisen fantasiat, ihmissuhdekoulukunnan ideologiat sekä uuden työn autonomiset järjestykset sisältävät yhtenäisiä piirteitä. Tutkimuksen pääkysymys on: miten affekteja rationalisoidaan työssä, työn tieteissä ja niiden kerrostumissa. Tutkimuksessa kysytään myös, miten affekti kiinnittää luokittuneet ja sukupuolittuneet subjektit työn rationalisoinnin aatteeseen ja millaisia mahdollisuuksia työläiseksi tulemiseen niissä tarjotaan. Kysymystä lähestytään monipuolisen aineiston ja lukuisten teemojen kautta. Aineistoina toimivat muun muassa rationalisoinnin klassikko-teokset, operaismo-vaikutteisen prekariaattiliikkeen pamfletit, ajatushautomoiden uuden työn visiot, self-help-teokset uranaisille sekä Helsingin Sanomien työelämäkeskustelut. Tutkimuksen monipuolista aineistoa lähiluetaan ja tulkitaan siihen luodun erityisen metodologian kautta, joka koostuu kolmesta osa-alueesta: historiallistaminen, paikantuminen ja figuurit. Kaksi ensimmäistä korostavat kontekstien ja position merkitystä tiedon tuotannossa, kolmas osoittaa tiedon tuottamisen valtasuhteita. Työn tieteiden visiot ideaalityöläisestä materialisoituvat figuurien kautta negaatioina kuvaten sitä, millainen ideaalityöläinen ei ole. Väitöskirja aineistoineen paikantuu Suomeen, mutta se osoittaa työn tieteiden ja affektiivisen rationalisoinnin globaaliutta sekä sidonnaisuutta Yhdysvaltoihin, sen yrityskulttuuriin ja esimerkiksi työtehotutkimuksiin Hawthornen elektroniikkatehtaalla vuosina 1924–1933. Väitöskirja tuo uusia näkökulmia nykykeskusteluun työstä, työläisistä, kapitalismista ja affekteista. Se osoittaa, että itsen tuntemisen ja kertomisen tieteitä, kuten psykologiaa, tarjotaan usein ratkaisuksi kapitalistisen tuotannon aiheuttamiin suuriin ja pieniin kurjuuksiin, vaikka terapeuttinen tunnekulttuuri itsessään on muodostunut osana rationalisoinnin ja kapitalismin ambivalentteja kehiä. Tutkimus myös muistuttaa, että työn järjestyksien keskiössä säilyy työläisen ja affektitehtaan konflikti silloinkin, kun fordistinen imperatiivi ”älä!” vaihtuu postfordistiseen kehotukseen ”tunne”.

Aktör eller handelsvara?

Kirjallisuusarvostelu

O dólar e os desequilíbrios globais

The global expansion of capitalism under American hegemony in the second half of the 20th century has changed the international division of labor and center-periphery scheme proposed under British hegemony. Under the new international division of labor, the United States is forced to generate an ever growing deficit in their trade account in order to accommodate the "mercantilist' expansion of Asian countries, produced by the trans-nationalization of big capital, under American aegis. This form of global economic articulation is at the root of the rupture of the Bretton Woods system and the growing financial liberalization imposed by the hegemonic power over other countries since the 80s.

Mudança em tempos de globalização: o capitalismo não é mais progressista?

Technical progress and economic development are promotions of capitalism, says a well known idea hereby contradicted. Recent changes under neoliberalism show that the more freedom of move to capital the less development of productive forces. There was no synchronicity and coherence fostering economic growth between changes at the micro level of techno-productive and managerial innovations and the ones at the macro level of institutional structures and economic policy. Empowerment of finance capital and monopolies got them opportunity to control the state and set its economic policy to support fictitious capital accumulation and to rule restructuring of corporate management. Surplus redistribution favoring finance capital is a burden to be carried on the back of society's productive structures, lowering investment, employment and growth. Focusing Latin America and Brazil, the same picture is seen, worsened by external fragility that deepens historical dependency.

Economia e retórica: o capítulo brasileiro

Considering the rise of the discussion about the rhetoric of economics at the beginning of the 1980's, the paper aims to show: 1) the relation between the origin of this issue in the academic field and the ascension of the so labeled "neoliberalism" as a doctrine and a collection of capitalist practices perceived at the same time; and 2) the consequences produced by this idea, overseas born, when it meets a peripherical reality like the Brazilian one. In the first case, we are going to show the importance of Hayek's reflections about the inadequateness of neoclassical discourse to the aim of ideologically legitimate the market society. In the second we are going to point out that, taking the consequences of the rhetoric project in Brazil, it can be seeing as an additional chapter of "the ideas out of its place" that comes marking the Brazilian history of the ideas.