The Challenge of Sustainability at the Farm Level: Presidential Address

The sustainability of farming systems is currently under debate. There is concern that technological and other changes have long-run consequences, which may compromise future levels of desired outputs from agricultural and other resources. The paper traces developments in the theory of sustainability and discusses their application at the farm level. Findings include firstly, that sustainability should be regarded as an emergent property of an agricultural system. Its operational definition at the farm level thus may not apply at other levels in the hierarchy. Secondly, whilst individual farmers may attach value to “sustainability” goods, they are unlikely to adopt socially optimal levels without regulation or incentive. Finally, since sustainability issues at the farm level are usually long-run, dynamic and have social dimensions, a central task for farm management researchers lies in investigations which allow tradeoffs between different sustainability criteria to be determined and then optimised according to society's norms.     

The hot house and the politics of production: Piecework Bargaining in retrospect

Brown's studies of piecework bargaining are reviewed in light of later research and changing conditions. Some extensions are needed, for example, in relation to the definition of custom and practice. And some neglected themes, notably the role of gender in workplace bargaining, need attention. But the analytical framework is essentially robust. Its theoretical pay‐off is elaborated, and arguments that industrial relations lacks an adequate theory of pay are disputed. Its current relevance is illustrated in relation to the explosion of pay at the top of the earnings distribution.     

In the mirror of the market: The disciplinary effects of company/fund manager meetings

This paper draws upon empirical qualitative research with Finance Directors and Investor Relations managers to examine the disciplinary consequences of their meetings with institutional investors. These ‘private’ meetings have increased both in frequency and importance in the last decade, but, when compared to public disclosure, they are relatively under researched. Existing studies have focussed on the role that the meetings play either in the market for information, or as a mechanism for corporate governance. By contrast, in this paper we draw upon Foucault’s analysis of power/knowledge to explore how the meetings shape executive subjectivity. The meetings take place in the context of a proliferation of techniques through which corporate performance is disclosed, modelled, compared and ranked. Such visibility makes possible processes of executive subjection which the paper traces firstly in the anticipatory self-discipline of executive’s extensive rehearsals for the meetings, and secondly in the rituals of face-to-face scrutiny of the meetings themselves where the body of the executive is understood to represent the company. The paper then explores the ways in which subjection to investors enables executives to speak on behalf of the investor within the business and effect its restructuring in the name of shareholder value. We suggest that these neglected disciplinary effects of company/fund manager meetings have been all too potent in recent years.     

Do institutional shareholders police management?

Some have argued that legislation limits the ability of institutional shareholders to discipline shirking management teams. However the level of takeover activity in the 1980s suggests that the cost of using takeovers to discipline management has decreased. This may give institutional shareholders the ability to participate actively in corporate governance. This paper presents an empirical examination that is consistent with this hypothesis. First, institutional ownership concentration varies across firms according to the benefits of policing firms in 1988. The relationship is less pronounced in 1980. Second, firms characterized by concentrated institutional ownership are more likely to use takeovers as the disciplinary mechanism. © 1997 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

顺流而动并非上策

正在市场环境瞬息万变的今天,为改变而改变一定是最优选择么?怎样调整才能既保留公司核心竞争力,又开拓新的领域?商海行舟,不进则退。不变革便衰败,只有挣脱束缚自己的枷锁才能更好地前行。当今世界日新月异,组织必须与时俱进以保证利润和市场份额的观念已深入人心,并被奉为金句。从百事达(Blockbuster)到柯达,从纸质报业到投币电话制造商,更给了我们"不变则死"的惨痛教训。各行各业也都有公司为自己的因循守旧埋了单。