Foreign role models and standardisation in Nordic business education

Scand. J. Mgmt. 16 (2000) 1}24

Foreign role models and standardisation in Nordic business education Lars Engwall * Department of Business Studies, Uppsala University, Box 513, S-751 20 Uppsala, Sweden Received 1 January 1998; accepted 1 November 1998

Abstract This paper presents an analysis of role models for the two oldest business schools in the four Nordic countries * Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden. The schools are studied with respect to their institutional development and their present curricula. The data presented lends support to the idea that cultural a$nity has been important to the choice of such models, and that national followers have tended to adapt to domestic leaders. It is also shown that the Nordic business schools appear to exhibit a mix of local and US features. ( 2000 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction As we now approach the millenium we can look back and see that the 20th century has brought about the worldwide di!usion of business education. A 100 years ago this type of education as a whole was still in its infancy, and the Nordic business schools were founded successively in the course of the "rst three decades of the present century. Since then business education has become a major element in modern systems of higher education (Engwall, 1992). An important question in connection with this development concerns the nature of business education: is it de"ned locally or modelled on international prototypes? Research that emphasises the importance of paying serious attention to the national context in managing organisations (see e.g. Hickson, 1993; Hickson & Pugh, 1995; Stewart et al., 1994; Whitley, 1992a,b; Whitley & Kristensen, 1996,1997) would

* Corresponding author. Tel.: #46-18-4711381; fax: #46-18-4716810. E-mail address: [email protected] (L. Engwall) 0956-5221/00/$ - see front matter ( 2000 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved. PII: S 0 9 5 6 - 5 2 2 1 ( 9 9 ) 0 0 0 0 6 - 8

2

L. Engwall / Scand. J. Mgmt. 16 (2000) 1}24

seem to favour the "rst alternative. On the other hand, neo-institutionalists argue that organisations acting in the same "eld will tend to adapt to each other, regardless of where they are, thus coming to resemble one another more and more (see e.g. DiMaggio & Powell, 1983; Meyer & Rowan, 1977; Powell & DiMaggio, 1991; Scott, 1995). In choosing between these two alternatives there seems good reason to believe that the second is becoming increasingly appropriate due to growing internationalisation and a tendency to take North American universities as the benchmark for business education and research performance. It seems particularly relevant to study this question in small countries like the Nordic examples, where for some considerable time a few institutions have dominated the stage. Under such circumstances, it might seem likely that local institutions would follow each other and, as a result of diseconomies of scale, they might also be especially in#uenced by developments on the vast North American market for business education. An analysis of Nordic academic business education will thus be presented in this paper. Business education will "rst be examined as a social construction, after which some data on the foundations and role models of Nordic business schools will be presented. This will be followed by an analysis of present curricula, and the paper closes with some concluding comments.

2. Business education as a social construction Scholars in the "eld of business administration have tended for some time to refer to Berger and Luckmann (1966) and to these authors' argument that reality is socially constructed. Needless to say this view has not been totally accepted in all camps, but there seems to be fairly widespread agreement that the social constructivist view is important to an understanding of the creation and development of human institutions. Among these, institutions of higher education appear to be a particularly "tting target for such an approach. They provide a very special product, the content of which is by de"nition not known beforehand and which is only consumed once. Moreover, immediately after completion of such an education it is not certain whether or not it was good. Its quality is not revealed until many years after the exam, in confrontation with practical life. For these reasons the education is very dependent on reputation or `social capitala (see e.g. Bourdieu, 1984), which is constructed in turn through a long-term social process, whereby various actors express their views in interaction with one another on the quality of the institutions. They do this by way of verbal statements or by manifesting their trust or mistrust in their educational choices (students) or their hiring decisions (employers). The above-mentioned trust-building process is particularly interesting with respect to the development of relatively young educational institutions, like those o!ering academic business education. As has been noted, many of these are still less than a 100 years old. At the turn of the century they had to enter an arena already populated by programmes in the arts, engineering and law, which in many cases were o!ered at prestigious institutions. Most of the business schools created at that time have succeeded in this competition, and in many countries have become eH lite institutions,

L. Engwall / Scand. J. Mgmt. 16 (2000) 1}24

3

from which a large proportion of top managers are recruited (see e.g. Amdam, 1996). In this process at least two elements seem to have been instrumental: (1) a demand for the content of an academic business education, and (2) a desire to use business schools as status providers. First of all, it was thus important to the development of business schools that they were able to meet a need for the di!usion of more sophisticated methods for accounting, control and distribution systems, as industrialisation was leading to the creation of large corporations (see Chandler, 1977, 1990 for a more detailed exposition). In other words, the new institutions were responding to a developing market. However, this was not enough, since many representatives of the established academic institutions both in Europe and the United States opposed the creation of the new programmes (see e.g. Engwall & Gunnarsson, 1994, Chapter 1). It was therefore important that they should attract external "nancial support. This came from prominent businessmen and local politicians in Europe and the United States, who began to regard the business schools as important institutions. The businessmen saw them as a means for enhancing the status of their own group and therefore supported them "nancially (cf. e.g. Gunnarsson, 1988, Chapter 8). The local politicians, on the other hand, seem to have been keen to support the new institutions in order to provide an adequate infrastructure for industrial development. These various elements inspired the foundation of one school after another in a follow-my-leader process. Role models were sought and transferred or translated to other contexts through social interaction. In this process we can expect cultural a$nity to have played an important part. As cultural closeness is important in international business (see e.g. Hofstede, 1980, 1994; Johanson, 1994), it can be expected to work in the same way in the selection of role models. We can thus put forward the proposition that: P1: Foreign role models are likely to be taken from countries of close cultural aznity. When new institutions such as business schools are introduced into a country, the process mentioned is likely to continue domestically. We can expect that the "rst mover will be followed by others, which tend to resemble the "rst one due to the existence of a common legal framework or as a result of imitation. This leads us to a second proposition, that P2: Followers in a country come to resemble the domestic leader. In the case of both propositions it should be noted that the social processes continue. Early role models may be replaced by new ones, and followers may take some time to adapt to the leader. There is also reason to believe that adaptation to the role models becomes stronger over time, as certain institutions succeed in building a reputation and the national legal framework develops. This has become particularly marked in recent years as evaluations and benchmarking are becoming increasingly common (see e.g. Rombach & Sahlin-Andersson, 1995). Thus we can see processes that reinforce the mechanism of the `iron cage revisiteda as discussed by DiMaggio

4

L. Engwall / Scand. J. Mgmt. 16 (2000) 1}24

and Powell (1983). Another force which can be expected to standardise curricula comes from the large publishing houses, particularly in North America. As Ritzer (1993) pointed out in his discussion of the McDonaldization of society, the operations of these companies have led to the increasing elaboration and widespread di!usion of the educational material. However, we could also argue that individual institutions develop their own research pro"les, thus tending to specialise in both their research and their educational programmes. This could be expected particularly within a discipline like business administration, which according to Whitley (1984) is characterised by high task uncertainty and low dependence among scholars. We should note, too, that institutions only change slowly and only in part. We can therefore expect to "nd sediments from earlier times surviving as important elements. These two propositions will be further scrutinised in the following sections in relation to academic business education in the Nordic countries. Strict tests will not be applied; rather, the propositions will be used as devices in the analysis in order to develop an understanding of the institutional processes that are the topic of the present paper.

3. The creation of the institutions 3.1. Foundation The "rst Nordic arena to open itself to academic business education was Sweden (see Table 1), where the Stockholm School of Economics (SSE) was established in 1909. Fourteen years later in 1923 the School acquired a follower in Gothenburg (GSE). The two schools remained a duopoly for 35 years, until chairs of business administration were created at Lund University and Uppsala University. This development opened the way for an expansion of the discipline that has made it one of the largest in the Swedish system for higher education today, with programmes o!ered at some 25 institutions. The second Nordic country to establish academic business education was Finland. Only two years after the foundation of SSE in 1911 the Helsinki School of Economics (HSE) was established. Followers arrived 16 years later with the start of the Swedish School of Economics in Helsinki (SSEH) and the Swedish School of Economics in Turku. After another 39 years, in 1966, business education was introduced in Finnish universities. Even before that, however, in 1950, a Finnish-language business school had also been created in Turku, which meant that more foundations occurred in Finland than in the other countries before business administration was made available at the universities. The obvious reason for this was the existence of two languages in the country, Finnish and Swedish. The third Nordic country to introduce academic business studies was Denmark, at the Copenhagen Business School (CBS) in 1922. This time the "rst follower, Aarhus Business School (ABS), was established 17 years later in 1939. It then took another 46 years, until 1985, before business administration was introduced at the universities of

L. Engwall / Scand. J. Mgmt. 16 (2000) 1}24

5

Table 1 Foundations of Nordic Institutions for Academic Business Education Country

Sweden

Finland

Denmark

Norway

First institution Second institution

Stockholm 1909 Gothenburg 1923

Copenhagen 1922 Aarhus 1939

Bergen 1936 Oslo 1943

Third instituion Time between the foundation of the "rst and the second instituion Time between the second and third instituion

1958 14 years

Helsinki 1911 Helsinki and Turku 1927 1966 16 years

1985 17 years

1985 7 years

35 years

39 years

46 years

42 years

Sources: Engwall (1992), Jessen & Nissen (1995), Vieru & Sippola (1995), and Wallace & Cisternas (1995).

Aalborg, Odense and Roskilde. At the same time the Southern Business School started its operations "rst in S+nderborg and later in Esbjerg. At present it is in the course of merging with the School in Odense. The fourth and "nal country to adopt academic business education was Norway, where the Norwegian School of Economics and Business Administration (NSEB) was founded in 1936. Here a further contender, the Norwegian School of Management (NSM), started only seven years later. However, it was not until 1985, i.e. 49 years after its foundation, that NSM was given the right to award the sivil~konom degree. Also in 1985 business studies were introduced at Bod+ Regional College. Business administration is still not taught at the University of Oslo. The foundation of academic business education in the Nordic countries thus occured in the following order: Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Norway. Within the four countries we have seen that the "rst contenders appeared one to two decades after the "rst entrant, while it took roughly another four decades for further institutions to emerge. Thus, although the creation of a second business school occurred fairly soon after the foundation of the "rst, further development took a much longer time. Two interacting forces were at work here: the established schools were eager to protect their duopoly, and university professors were resistant to a "eld of the kind that business administration represented (see Engwall, 1992, Chapter 1; Engwall, 1998). 3.2. Available role models When it comes to the role models available for Nordic academic business education, it appears that in Europe the Germans were particularly active in creating the new institutions, which they called Handelshochschulen. These were created as independent institutions outside the universities in many major German cities: in Aachen and in Leipzig in 1898, Cologne and Frankfurt-am-Main in 1901, Berlin in 1906, Mannheim in 1907, Munich in 1910, KoK nigsberg in 1915 and Nuremberg

6

L. Engwall / Scand. J. Mgmt. 16 (2000) 1}24

in 1919 (Engwall, 1992, pp. 4}5). Handelshochschulen thus appear to have been set up in a process which exhibits certain features of copy-cat behaviour. Local politicians and businessmen felt it was important to match the projects of other German cities. In many cases the idea was also to use the business schools as a platform for the future foundation of a university. Eventually some of the Handelshochschulen actually became universities, or were integrated into existing ones (see further Meyer, 1998). As a result a large part of academic business education in Germany today is part of the university system. Due to the heavy technical orientation of German industry, this academic business education has produced only a limited number of top executives. It has also been criticised for being insu$ciently related to practice (Lawrence, 1989; Kipping, 1998). Another important arena that provided role models was the United States. The front runner there was the Wharton School of Finance and Commerce, which was founded in 1881 at the University of Pennsylvania. This initiative was followed at several other universities in the United States at the turn of the century (Engwall, 1992, pp. 4}5): University of California in 1898, University of Chicago in 1898, Dartmouth College in 1900, Columbia University in 1908, and Harvard University in 1908. A large number of universities followed suit: by 1936 there were thus 180 business schools in the country, and by the early 1970s the majority of the 2500 or so institutions of higher education in the United States [o!ered] some sort of business education (Howell, 1971, p. 522). However, it should be stressed that there is no one American solution to academic business education, although the American Association of Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB) has been calling for a certain standardisation. Thus already in the 1920s AACSB, for instance, required collegiate business schools to `o!er a reasonable amount of work in at least "ve groups of study, such as business "nance, accounting, business law, marketing and statisticsa (McKenna, 1989, p. 32). Thus while German Handelshochschulen were created outside the universities and were eventually integrated into the university system, the US business schools were founded within it. At least two possible explanations of this state of a!airs can be mentioned. First, it seems that di!erences in the university systems were important. The German state universities with their Lehrstuhl tradition were less likely to admit new disciplines into their alma mater than the more #exible US universities. Second, the status of businessmen at the turn of the century was much higher in the United States than in Germany. It certainly also helped to promote the acceptance of the business school idea when such people as Amos Tuck and Joseph Wharton made donations for the foundation of business schools, in order to prepare future businessmen for their careers. In Europe there were also some initiatives in the other two great powers of the time, France and the United Kingdom. In France the Paris Chamber of Commerce had founded l'E! cole Supe& rieure de Commerce de Paris (ESCP) as early as 1820. In 1881, the same year as the foundation of the Wharton School of Business and Finance in Philadelphia, a second school started in Paris, l'E! cole des Hautes E! tudes Commerciales (HEC). A number of local schools of commerce were also set up over the years in France. By 1900 there were already ten regional French e& coles supe& rieures de

L. Engwall / Scand. J. Mgmt. 16 (2000) 1}24

7

commerce (Barsoux, 1989, p. 122). However, their impact was limited for two reasons. First, France had a developed system of grandes e& coles, of which the Paris-based E! cole Polytechnique and E! cole des Mines were particularly important in the recruitment of top managers (Granick, 1972). Second, for a long time the French business schools had no permanent faculty members, which meant that they had di$culty in developing as academic institutions (Whitley et al., 1981). In the United Kingdom the London School of Economics was opened to students in 1895, with a view to providing an education that would stand `in the same relation to the life and calling of the manufacturer, the merchant, and other men of business as the medical schools of the universities stand to that of the doctora. However, these plans did not materialise, and the LSE become more of a school for civil servants, for employees of the City of London and for Third World Politicians than for businessmen. Similarly, the commerce degrees that were launched at Manchester University in 1904 and at London University in 1920 provided a route to top management positions to a limited extent only. The reason for the failure to create business schools in the United Kingdom were the same as in France, namely the existence of eH lite institutions. Traditionally, education at Cambridge or Oxford had been the required background for British leaders. It was thus not until the 1960s that US-style business schools were created in London and Manchester. Eventually business education did spread even in Britain, and today both Cambridge and Oxford o!er MBA programmes. We can thus conclude that the founders of Nordic academic business education could "nd inspiration in many countries. Initiatives were being taken in all the major countries at the time. The Germans created Handelshochschulen, the North Americans business schools, the French e& coles de commerce and the English schools of commerce. 3.3. Adopted role models If we look at the role models that actually inspired the founding fathers in the Nordic countries, the German Handelshochschulen clearly emerge as the prototype for the Stockholm School of Economics (SSE). An analysis of the evaluation reports that were submitted before the foundation of the school, for instance, had a bias towards German institutions. Similarly, the Swedish journals that wrote about business schools at the turn of the century tended to favour German business schools. Among those most often mentioned were the schools in Leipzig, Frankfurt-am-Main, Cologne, Aachen and Berlin (Gunnarsson, 1988, pp. 246, 237). The German orientation was of course reinforced by the fact that the "rst professor at the SSE (Ernst Walb) was a German, a student of Eugen Schmalenbach, who even taught in German. When he left after two years, he was succeeded by another student of Schmalenbach from Cologne (Oskar SilleH n). Analyses of the curriculum also show that originally it had many points in common with that in Cologne (Engwall, 1992, Chapter 3; Wallerstedt, 1988, Chapter 3; Wallerstedt, 1995). When the Gothenburg School of Economics (GSE) started in 1923 the German model again came to dominate. As in Stockholm the "rst professor was a German (Walter Mahlberg), who stayed for a few years. His successor was another

8

L. Engwall / Scand. J. Mgmt. 16 (2000) 1}24

German (Albert ter Vehn), who held his o$ce for more than forty years (Engwall, 1992, Chapter 2; Albach, 1995; JoK nsson, 1995). By the time the GSE was founded, the academic orientation of the SSE was beginning to be in#uenced by the United States as a result of the study trips made by professors and students. An orientation towards Europe in the study trips during the "rst decades in the century was gradually replaced by an orientation towards the US. In the "rst decade only one in ten students on study tours went to the United States. Between the wars, this ratio rose to 40 per cent and since the Second World War it has remained at over 50 per cent. As a result of these American contacts, teaching and research have increasingly come to focus on marketing and organisational problems (see Engwall, 1992. Chapters 3, 6). The Helsinki School of Economics (HSE), founded in 1911, seems to have followed a route similar to that of SSE. Fellman (1994, p. 10) even refers to the chosen approach as `a Swedish modela. In her opinion, however, `the Swedish business schools developed faster and reached an academic level much sooner than the Finnish schoolsa. A contributing factor to this state of a!airs may have been that the Swedish school in Helsinki (SSEH) was not a completely new foundation. In fact it had started in 1909 as a commercial academy and became a business school in 1927 (Westerlund, 1984). Its role models can therefore be said to have been domestic rather than international. After the war a strong Swedish and indirectly a US in#uence appeared, with the appointment of several Swedes (Christer Danielsson, Carl-Gustav EngstroK m, Olof Henell, and Dick RamstroK m) to the sta! of SSEH (Westerlund, 1984, pp. 189, 190). Like the Swedish school in Helsinki, the Copenhagen Business School (CBS) arose from the upgrading of part of the existing Copenhagen Academy of Commerce. Its role models thus appear to have been mainly domestic institutions such as the Technical University (1828) and the Royal Veterinary and Agricultural University (1858) (Borum & Westenholz, 1995, p. 117). With the passage of time the CBS also assumed the attributes of ordinary institutions of higher education with the two "rst full professorships in 1935 and, later, with the introduction of research degrees (cf. below). As a result of "nancial di$culties the CBS eventually became increasingly dependent on the state and became an integrated part of the Danish educational system. In terms of international orientation, it has turned, like the others, towards the United States to a considerable extent (Borum & Westenholz, 1995; Lange, 1992; Vibvk & Kobbernagel, 1980). The second Danish business school, Aarhus Business School (ABS), also belongs to the group of Nordic institutions that developed out of existing non-academic institutions. It had been in operation since 1905, but it was not until 1939 that part of the existing school was upgraded to an academic level. In 1956 it even became an institution in its own right. Like CBS it had a language section and signi"cant elements of language studies in the programmes. CBS appears to have been the most important role model (Gammelga> rd, 1989). The Norwegian School of Economics and Business (NSEB), like the Swedish schools, was strongly in#uenced by the German Handelshochschulen. This in#uence came initially by way of study trips in the 1910s (Jensen & Str+mme Svendsen, 1986,

L. Engwall / Scand. J. Mgmt. 16 (2000) 1}24

9

pp. 30}31) but primarily through the appointment of Swedish professors. The "rst teachers were a Swedish engineer trained in business administration at SSE (Robert Kristensson) and two Norwegians (one engineer, Dag Coward, and one economist, Eilif Paulsen) trained by a German (Albert ter Vehn) at GSE (Amdam & Norstr+m, 1994, pp. 68}69). After the Second World War, however, the NSEB acquired a very strong American orientation. This occurred as a result of the study trips undertaken by professors and young Norwegian scholars to the United States to obtain their PhDs (Amdam & Norstr+m, 1994, p. 73). The second school in Norway, the Norwegian School of Management (NSM) appears to have been founded mainly with a view to providing a more practically oriented alternative to NSEB. Thus while the school in Bergen focused on accounting theory, the one in Oslo concentrated on accounting practice. In the same vein economics, an important subject in Bergen, was not taught at all in Oslo (Amdam & Norstr+m, 1994, p. 73, 76). NSM actually appears to have started as an advanced school of commerce; from the mid-1960s onwards it then developed academic standards. To a considerable extent the early inspiration seems to have come from Sweden, albeit mainly from institutions with a practical orientation rather than from the two Swedish business schools. From the late 1950s onwards the role models came to an increasing extent from the United States (Amdam, 1993, Chapters 4}6). Another prominent feature of the Nordic business schools has been their research orientation. This made it possible for them to distingush themselves from the existing commercial academies as well as showing that they belonged to the academic family. For obvious reasons their research was very limited to start with. The "rst professor in business administration at SSE thus had no research credentials whatsoever, and was appointed on the basis of his practical experience. For quite a long time experience of this kind was regarded as valuable in assessing candidates for chairs, but eventually academic merits were given "rst priority (see Engwall, 1992, Chapter 4). An important step in adapting to the academic community was the decision to permit the business schools to award research degrees. In Sweden this process was initiated with the decision in 1943 to introduce the licentiate degree. Three years later the business schools were permitted to award the doctoral degree. The "rst Swedish doctorate in business administration was awarded in Gothenburg in 1950. Similar developments occurred in the other Nordic countries. In Finland the doctor's degree was introduced as early as 1931 at the Finnish School of Business in Helsinki and in 1944 at the Swedish School (Westerlund, 1984, pp. 39, 41). At NSEB the "rst doctoral degree in economics was awarded in 1957 (Jensen & Str+mme Svendsen, 1986, p. 400, 406). In Denmark research degrees were o!ered even later: the licentiate degree was introduced in 1959 and the doctoral degree in 1965 (Borum & Westenholz, 1995, p. 121). It seems that the growing research orientation at the Nordic business schools also stimulated their interest in the United States, as analyses of the references used by Nordic business scholars have shown. Early evidence is provided in Sundin (1983), which analyses the contributions to the eight Nordic conferences in business administration that took place between 1950 and 1979. But this interest becomes even more apparent in analyses of more recent Nordic research contributions. Studies of the "rst

10

L. Engwall / Scand. J. Mgmt. 16 (2000) 1}24

eight volumes of the Scandinavian Journal of Management (1984}1992), and the publications of Nordic scholars in a sample of 15 leading international management journals (Engwall, 1995,1996), clearly point in that direction. The four most frequently quoted works in both studies are North American books with a focus on organisation theory: Pfe!er and Salancik (1978), Cyert and March (1963), March and Simon (1958) and Thompson (1967). Among the next 15 top references the dominance of US scholars is also very strong, with only two co-authors (Johan P. Olsen and Gibson Burrell) and one solo author (John Child) who are non-Americans. 3.4. Conclusions The foundation history of the Nordic business schools seem to lend some support to our "rst proposition, i. e. that role models are likely to be come from countries of close cultural a$nity. It seems evident that the German Handelshochschulen constituted the role model for the Nordic schools. In particular the Swedes, who were the front runners, studied these schools before launching their own Swedish projects. Added to which, German professors were brought in as the "rst professors at SSE and GSE. Finland and Norway appear to have found their main German inspiration indirectly through Sweden, providing another indication of the importance of cultural a$nity. Further evidence of German in#uence is the fact that the Nordic business schools took and still use the name handelsho( gskola (with local variations in spelling), which is a direct translation of the German Handelshochschule. There can be no doubt that, at the time when the Nordic business schools were founded, Germany represented a country of close a$nity. Trade, cultural and political relations all exhibited such closeness. For example, in Swedish schools at least German was the "rst foreign language. It was therefore quite natural that many study trips from SSE chose Germany as their destination. Cultural a$nity is something that can change over time, however, and this is what happened in the Nordic countries. The intervention of the United States in the First World War and the subsequent defeat of Germany was no doubt an important factor for change. This tendency became even stronger after the Second World War. According to Ludvig Rasmusson, a Swedish observer in the mid-1980s, Sweden changed after the war from `being one of the most Germanised countries in Europe [to being] one of the most Americaniseda (Rasmusson, 1985, p. 130). This also seems to have applied to Nordic academic business education, which became increasingly oriented towards the United States. An important factor behind this development was the growing supply of managerial ideas that arrived from the other side of the Atlantic. It should also be noted that a crucial role model for all the schools was the collective of established academic institutions, whose research orientation was gradually being taken on board by the business schools. This was manifest in the gradual adoption of important academic attributes. The growing research orientation seems in turn to have reinforced the strong North American orientation of the Nordic business schools. Adaptation to domestic academic institutions rather than to international role models, was also the basic mechanism behind some of the Nordic foundations. This

L. Engwall / Scand. J. Mgmt. 16 (2000) 1}24

11

seems to have applied to the two Danish business schools (CBS and ABS) and one of the Finnish institutions (SSEH), which all grew out of existing non-academic institutions of business education. To a certain extent this can also be said of the later development of the second Norwegian institution (NSM). These foundations thus provide some support for our second proposition, i.e. that followers in a country are likely to adapt to domestic leaders. The Swedish data also points in this direction. A comparison between SSE and GSE shows that their institutional development was rather similar. However, turning to Finland and Norway, we "nd that to begin with the followers were instead o!ering something di!erent from the leader. In Finland the grounds for di!erentiation were linguistic; in Norway it was a question of o!ering a more practical orientation. The extent to which this has persisted will be analysed further below as we turn to the present situation. The focus now will be on the long-term e!ects of the institutionalisation process. To this end the curricula at the two oldest schools in each of the four Nordic countries * i.e. SSE and GSE in Sweden, HSE and SSEH in Finland, CBS and ABS in Denmark, and NSEM and NSM in Norway * will be analysed in relation to the two propositions. Needless to say, the analysis is neutral and implies no evaluation of the standards of the eight schools.

4. The institutions in the 1990s 4.1. Role models In studying present role models we will take as an indicator the nationality of the literature used. For the sake of comparability we have restricted the analysis to published books, excluding articles, compendia, etc., or books that students have to choose for themselves. This principle can of course be questioned. It could be argued that the exclusion of compendia, etc., reduces the real importance of the domestic material. Against this, however, it should be pointed out that in some of the schools (particularly CBS and ABS) it is also customary to use US articles as supplementary reading, so this works in the other direction too. In any case it must be stressed that the "gures reported below can only be taken as rough indicators. Another factor making for some uncertainty concerns variations in the quality of the literature lists. One indication of this is that the number of titles sometimes varies (see Table 2). One reason for this may be that not all items used in the programmes have been included in the o$cial lists. It was pointed out to us at more than one school that professors and lecturers do sometimes add their own literature suggestions along the way. Unfortunately, there is little possibility of doing anything about this problem. However, there is no reason to believe that it has created any particular bias, which would a!ect the results. Since the reference information was far from complete, it has been updated from a search in WWW databases. This was also very useful when it came to classifying the nationality of the books. A choice then had to be made between using the nationality of the publisher or that of the author. In most cases the two coincide, and the

12

L. Engwall / Scand. J. Mgmt. 16 (2000) 1}24

Table 2 Origin of the literature in the curricula at the di!erent schools Country

Denmark

Finland

Norway

Sweden

Total

Origin

CBS

ABS

HSE

SSEH

NSEB

NSM

SSE

GSE

USA 29.5 UK 17.8 Other non-Nordic 4.0 Total non-Nordic 51.3 Domestic 45.3 Other Nordic 3.4 Total Nordic 48.7 Total 100.0 Number of titles 149

44.7 12.1 2.1 59.0 40.0 1.1 41.1 100.0 95

48.0 15.2 1.6 64.7 31.5 3.8 35.3 100.0 224

43.8 16.4 1.4 61.7 12.3 26.0 38.4 100.0 146

52.0 5.1 2.0 59.2 38.8 2.0 40.8 100.0 49

50.0 10.0 1.0 61.0 35.5 3.5 39.0 100.0 99

44.9 6.6 5.9 57.4 37.5 5.2 42.7 100.0 67

32.4 8.8 3.2 44.4 52.4 3.2 55.6 100.0 125

42.2 13.0 2.5 57.7 35.5 6.8 42.3 100.0 954

publisher option is probably the most reliable. However, in terms of the basic research question of the present paper, it can be problematic. Translations of US titles would then appear as domestic titles and publications by Nordic scholars in foreign countries would appear as non-domestic. For this reason the nationality of the publisher has not been used when there have been indications that it di!ers from the nationality of the author. When we look at the origin of the literature in the curricula (Table 2), we "nd that text-books from the United States constitute the largest group at all schools except CBS and GSE. Even there, however, about one-third of the titles are North American. At the other schools the share is over 40 per cent, even rising to around 50 per cent at the two Norwegian institutions and at HSE. At the institutions where US titles predominate, the Nordic titles account for 30}40 per cent, while their share at CBS and GSE approaches or exceeds 50 per cent. In most cases books from other Nordic countries are rare, the exception being SSEH, where more than a quarter of the titles do come from there. The obvious explanation is that the SSEH can easily use Swedish text-books. As a result the domestic share there is fairly low. In the case of both the Finnish schools it should also be noted that their curricula include "ve foreign titles that have been translated into Finnish. All in all, North American and Nordic books account for 80 per cent or more of the literature lists. The only other foreign country to have any signi"cant share of the titles is the UK, whose share in the total material is about one-eighth of other countries that appear, the Netherlands and Australia are the most frequently represented, while works from Canada, France, Germany, Spain and Switzerland occur only occasionally. None of the titles are in any language other than English or one of the Nordic languages. Again it should be stressed that there is no evaluative element in the comparison between the schools. We cannot in fact judge whether it is a good or a bad thing to exhibit a high ratio of US literature. On the one hand it could be argued that the use of North American text-books indicates an internationalisation of the curriculum and

L. Engwall / Scand. J. Mgmt. 16 (2000) 1}24

13

Table 3 Origin of the literature within di!erent sub-"elds Origin

A

B

C

D

Other

Total

Mean age

USA UK Other non-Nordic Total non-Nordic Domestic Other Nordic Total Nordic Total Number of titles Mean age

40.2 16.2 4.4 60.8 32.3 6.9 39.2 100.0 225 5.0

34.9 10.6 0.8 46.3 52.6 1.2 53.7 100.0 254 3.9

51.3 7.1 2.7 61.2 35.7 3.1 38.8 100.0 112 4.8

49.3 15.5 1.7 66.5 22.4 11.1 33.5 100.0 203 4.6

41.9 13.1 3.1 58.1 29.4 12.5 41.9 100.0 160 4.7

42.2 13.0 2.5 57.7 35.5 6.8 42.3 100.0 954 4.5

5.2 4.3 6.8 5.0 3.7 4.6 3.9 4.7

an adaptation to international standards. On the other hand, it could be claimed that the use of domestic titles may indicate a closer link between teaching and research. Professors and lecturers use their own texts, which means that the Humboldt ideal can be pursued to a greater extent. Furthermore, the domestic titles can be invoked as signalling a willingness to use alternative approaches rather than sticking to standardised teaching methods. There is good reason to believe that the in#uence of foreign role models varies between the di!erent specialised "elds within business administration. For instance, we might expect that a sub-"eld like accounting, with a need for national institutional knowledge, might have a smaller share of foreign literature. In order to explore this question, the titles have been classi"ed according to the traditional Swedish sub-"elds: (A) administration, (B) accounting and "nance, (C) managerial economics and (D) marketing. In addition it was necessary to include a miscellaneous group. The analysis of the classi"ed material (see Table 3) reveals as expected a higher domestic share for accounting and "nance, 52.6 per cent, as against an average of about one-third for the total material (sixth line). The lowest "gure for the domestic material, on the other hand, is reported for marketing (22.4 per cent). This sub-"eld is also among the highest with respect to the US share (49.3 per cent). Like managerial economics, every second text-book in marketing originates in the US. It is also worth noting that on an average accounting and "nance has the most recent literature, with a mean age of 3.9 years compared to values of over 4.5 for the other sub-"elds (last line). This is probably an e!ect of the higher share of domestic literature, which for natural reasons can be considered for selection sooner, a point that is further underlined by the mean values for the di!erent nationalities (last column). Domestic titles thus have a mean age of less than 3.7 years, while the corresponding value for US titles is 5.2 and for other non-Nordic countries 6.8. The analysis thus seems to lend further support to our "rst proposition. The powerful in#uence of the United States on modern society is also re#ected in the literature used at the eight business schools studied. However, it would not be fair to

14

L. Engwall / Scand. J. Mgmt. 16 (2000) 1}24

say that they have turned into complete copies of the US business schools. The domestic elements are also strong } for two schools even stronger than the North American. Domestic elements are also stronger in accounting and "nance, due to the need for institutional knowledge. Needless to say titles of non-US origin may also have indirect US links, as a result of the training and research orientation of the domestic authors. It would be beyond the scope of this paper, however, to try to determine in#uences of this kind. 4.2. Leaders and followers Our second proposition indicates an expectation of similarities between followers and leaders in the di!erent countries. To explore this, we will look into the general structure of the programmes o!ered in the four countries and the extent to which the schools use the same kind of literature. The analysis of the curricula (Table 4) has focused mainly on the basic programmes, which means that the variety of combinations o!ered in some of the Nordic countries has not been taken into consideration. In Denmark, for instance, there are programmes that combine business studies and specialisation in languages, computer science, philosophy, law or mathematics. Another common feature of the programmes that was not possible to include, consists of international exchange programmes. All the schools o!er four-year programmes except the two Danish schools, which have a system involving two consecutive degrees: "rst a three-year bachelor's degree (HA), and then two-years of specialisation (Cand. merc.). A comparison between these two Danish schools reveals that the general structure of their programmes is rather similar. About a quarter of the programme is devoted to basic courses in business administration and another quarter to basic courses in other subjects such as statistics, law and economics. The main di!erence between the two schools is that CBS o!ers a greater degree of freedom by allowing one semester for electives. In terms of the mix within the basic courses, ABS appears to stress managerial economics and statistics etc. to a somewhat greater extent than CBS. Neither of the two schools require language studies. A comparison of the curricula of the two Finnish schools reveals a similar structure: basic studies followed by studies in a major and minor subject, language studies and electives. However, the two schools di!er somewhat in terms of the mix. At HSE the basic courses account for half the curricula (22.5#27.5 per cent), at SSEH for only one-third (12.3#22.0 per cent). The students at SSEH, on the other hand, devote more time to their major subject (43.7 per cent in comparison to 37.5 per cent at HSE). Another di!erence between the two schools is that more options are available for major studies at HSE highly than at SSEH. The two Norwegian schools o!er the same basic components as the other schools studied, namely statistics, economics and business administration. The basic courses in business administration constitute about one-third of the curriculum. NSM imposes stricter requirements than NSEB as regards the basic courses in other subjects (43.4 as against 30.0 per cent). This di!erence is mainly due to compulsory courses in languages (8.2 per cent) and commercial law (5.0 per cent) at NSM. These in turn can

L. Engwall / Scand. J. Mgmt. 16 (2000) 1}24

15

Table 4 General structure of the curricula at the eight Nordic business Schools studied (per cent). Country

Denmark

Finland

School

CBS

ABS

HSE

3.1 5.5 8.4 3.1 6.9 27.0

2.7 3.2 7.0 8.3 3.2 24.3

5.9 4.1 8.9 0.0 3.1 0.0 21.9 36.9 14.1 100.0 3#2

9.7 3.3 8.0 0.0 2.7 0.0 23.7 49.3 2.7 100.0 3#2

Basic business administration General business administration A: Administration B: Accounting and Finance C: Managerial Economics D: Marketing Total basic business/Administration Basic courses in other subjects Statistics, Mathematic, Methods Law Economics and Economic History Economic Geography Information Processing Languages Total basic courses other subjects Specialisation Minor subject and electives Total Number of years

Norway

Sweden

SSEH

NSEB

NSM

SSE

GSE

5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 2.5 22.5

0.0 3.1 4.6 1.5 3.1 12.3

4.4 6.2 4.4 8.8 4.4 28.0

5.0 6.9 6.9 8.2 6.9 34.0

9.4 3.1 9.4 3.1 3.1 28.2

0.0 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.3 25.0

7.5 2.5 2.5 0.0 2.5 12.5 27.5 37.5 12.5 100.0 4

1.9 1.9 5.0 1.9 1.9 9.4 22.0 43.7 22.0 100.0 4

11.3 0.0 12.5 0.0 6.3 0.0 30.0 25.0 17.0 100.0 4

15.1 5.0 10.1 0.0 5.0 8.2 43.4 22.6 0.0 100.0 4

6.3 6.3 18.8 0.0 3.1 0.0 34.4 37.5 0.0 100.0 4

6.3 6.3 18.8 6.3 0.0 0.0 37.5 37.5 0.0 100.0 4

Note: The calculations are based on information on study times provided in the material (HSE, SSEH, SSE and GSE), number of courses per year (NSEB and NSM) or weight given in the exam (CBS and ABS). Needless to say the "gures are dependent on the classi"cations made.

be seen as an e!ect of the traditionally more applied approach adopted at NSM (cf. above). However, NSEB students may take similar courses as electives (17 per cent). At the end of the programmes graduates from the two schools may therefore have followed a very similar curriculum. A comparison of the structure of the curricula at SSE and GSE reveals that they too are fairly similar. They both require about a quarter of the basic courses to be in business administration, a bit more than one-third in other disciplines and another good third for specialisation. In the case of the basic courses in business administration there are some minor variations, while the structure of the basic courses in other subjects di!ers on one point only: students at GSE have to take economic geography, while those at SSE must study information processing. Neither of the Swedish schools require language studies, although opportunities for such studies do exist. The comparisons between the di!erent schools thus appear to support the idea that, due to a common legal framework or social pressure, institutions tend to become similar nationally. Further evidence in this direction is provided by the designation of the exams, which varies between the four countries. Denmark has its two separate degrees while Norway has chosen to stick to the designation sivil~konom, which is the

16

L. Engwall / Scand. J. Mgmt. 16 (2000) 1}24

Norwegian translation of the title adopted in Sweden in 1943. The Finns and Swedes on their part have adopted the title ekonomie magister, which is clearly an e!ort to adapt to the US title of MBA. It is important to point out here that there are also similarities between the four Nordic countries. All institutions cover the basic areas of specialisation. They also require the study of statistics and economics. With the exception of NSEB, where it is optional, commercial law is also a required subject. Language studies are o!ered at all schools but are only compulsory at the two Finnish schools and at NSM. Freedom of choice is in fact an important issue in relation to the curricula: the overall average here is around 55 per cent, with SSEH (34 per cent) and NSM (77 per cent) at the two extremes. Another indicator of the interaction between the schools on the local markets is the overlap between the literature lists (Table 5). The two Danish schools share 15 titles, which corresponds to 15.8 per cent of the total ABS titles. Most of the overlapping titles belong to accounting and "nance, and marketing. About half of them come from the US. The same applies to the two Finnish schools, where the number of shared Table 5 Overlap between the literature lists in the four countries Country (institutions)

Number of joint titles

Follower's share of joint titles

The Shared Titles

Denmark (CBS and ABS)

15

15.8%

Finland 24 (HSE and SSEH)

16.4%

Norway 5 (NSEB and NSM)

5.1%

Sweden (SSE and GSE)

3.2%

Andersen et al. (1990), Andersen et al. (1994), Anthony and Govindarajan (1995), Blunch (1992), Brealey and Myers (1991), Christensen (1995), De Wit and Meyer (1994), Eiteman et al. (1994), Elton and Gruber (1995), Johansen and Mitens (1988), Linderoth et al. (1994), Otholm et al. (1996), Pedersen (1995), Peter and Olson (1993) and Stern and El-Ansary (1995). Arens and Loebbecke (1994), Brealey and Myers (1991), Burgelman and Sayles (1986), Churchill et al. (1993), Copeland and Weston (1988), COSO (1992), Drury (1992), Emmanuel et al. (1990), Flint (1988), Hull (1993), Ha> kansson and Snehota (1995), Katzenbach and Smith (1994), Kotler (1994), Leppiniemi (1995a), Leppiniemi (1995b), Loustarinen and Welch (1990), Ogden (1992), Porter (1980), Riistama (1995), Ryan et al. (1992), Sims et al. (1993), Smith et al. (1990), WikstroK m and Normann (1994), and Yin (1984). Adler (1991), Cooper and Kaplan (1991), Haugen (1993), Kaplan and Atkinson (1989) and Reve et al. (1992) Argyris (1990), FAR:s samlingsvolym (Collected Volume of the Swedish Association of Certi"ed Accountants), GroK nroos (1990) and Womack et al. (1990)

4

L. Engwall / Scand. J. Mgmt. 16 (2000) 1}24

17

Table 6 Cross-utilisation of titles School

CBS

ABS

HSE

SSEH

NSEB

NSM

SSE

GSE

CBS ABS HSE SSEH NSEB NSM SSE GSE Total Mean value Per cent of titles

* 15 8 2 5 2 6 4 42 6.0 4.0

15 * 11 7 3 4 4 6 50 7.1 7.5

8 11 * 24 4 11 5 8 71 10.1 4.5

2 7 24 * 3 9 6 14 65 9.3 6.4

5 3 4 3 * 5 5 0 25 3.6 7.3

2 4 11 9 5 * 4 9 44 6.3 6.4

6 4 5 6 5 4 * 4 34 4.9 7.4

4 6 8 14 0 9 4 * 45 6.4 5.1

titles is 24 or 16.4 per cent of the titles used at HSE. Almost half of them are in the area of accounting and a quarter in marketing. The overlap between the two Norwegian schools is smaller than in Denmark and Finland. There are only "ve such titles, which corresponds to 5.1 per cent of those used at NSM: three titles connected with accounting and managerial economics, one with international business and one with Norwegian industrial policy. A similar pattern can be observed in Sweden, where only four titles at GSE or 3.2 per cent coincide with those at SSE. The titles refer to accounting, service marketing and management. In terms of the literature chosen there can thus be some doubt, at least in Norway and Sweden, as to whether the schools follow each other nationally. This situation can even make us wonder whether the "eld of business education has become so internationalised that similarities over national borders may be greater than within them. In order to examine this we have analysed the links between all eight schools (Table 6), and have found that the links in terms of shared titles are strongest for the Danish and Finnish schools. For NSEB the links are at the same level (around 5) in relation to all the other seven schools. One link, the one with GSE, is even non-existent. NSM, on the other hand, has twice as strong links with HSE and GSE than with NSEB. Of the Swedish schools, SSE exhibits roughly the same pattern as NSEB, i.e. about "ve joint titles with all the other schools. And GSE, lastly, has its strongest links with SSEH and NSM. All in all, every pair of schools only shares on average 5.7 titles. However, there are some titles which link the institutions more than any of the others. The front-runner is the text-book in "nance by Brealey and Myers (1991), which is used in as many as six institutions (Table 7). Five schools have courses in strategy, using Porter (1980), while four institutions share another six titles. These last are books on auditing (Arens & Loebbecke, 1991), management accounting (Cooper & Kaplan, 1991), "nance (Foster, 1986; Hull, 1993), distribution channels (Stern & El-Ansary, 1992) and case study research (Yin, 1989).

18

L. Engwall / Scand. J. Mgmt. 16 (2000) 1}24

Table 7 Titles that are used in more than two schools Title

Schools using the title

No. of schools

Brealey and Myers (1991) Porter (1980) Arens and Loebbecke (1994) Cooper and Kaplan (1991) Foster (1986) Hull (1993) Stern and El-Ansary (1992) Yin (1989) Anthony and Govindarajan (1995) Bradley (1995) Copeland and Weston (1988) Douma and Schreuder (1991) Drury (1992) Eiteman et al. (1992) Gadde and Ha> kansson (1993) GroK nroos (1990) Kaplan and Atkinson (1989) Kotler (1994) Lambert and Stock (1993) Loustarinen and Welch (1990) Morgan (1986) Ryan, Scapens and Theobald (1992) Welford and Gouldson (1993) Yukl (1989) 80 titles used at two institutions

ABS, CBS, HSE, NSEB, SSE, SSEH ABS, HSE, NSEM, SSE, SSEH GSE, HSE, NSM, SSEH CBS, HSE, NSEB, NSM ABS, HSE, GSE, NSM ABS, HSE, NSEB, SSEH ABS, CBS, HSE, SSE ABS, HSE, SSE, SSEH ABS, CBS, GSE CBS, SSE, SSEH HSE, NSM, SSEH CBS, NSEB, SSE HSE, GSE, SSEH ABS, CBS, GSE GSE, NSM, SSEH GSE, SSE, SSEH NSEB, NSM, SSE HSE, NSM, SSEH GSE, NSM, SSEH HSE, NSM, SSEH ABS, GSE, SSEH HSE, GSE, SSEH ABS, HSE, GSE CBS, NSEB, SSE Various pairs of the institutions

6 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2

Among the 16 titles used in three institutions we "nd a relatively even distribution between administration (Douma & Schreuder, 1991; Morgan, 1986; Yukl, 1989), accounting and "nance (Copeland & Weston, 1988; Eiteman & Mo!ett, 1992; Ryan et al., 1992), managerial economics (Anthony et al., 1995; Drury, 1992; Kaplan & Atkinson, 1989) and marketing (Bradley, 1995; Gadde & Ha> kansson, 1993; GroK nroos, 1990; Kotler, 1994). Further, this group contains books on international business (Loustarien & Welch, 1990), logistics (Lambert & Stock, 1993), and environmental management and business strategy (Welford & Gouldson, 1993). Finally, there are an additional 80 titles that are used by two institutions. This means that of a total of 815 titles, 104 or 12.8 per cent are used in more than one school. The other side of the coin is that 87.2 per cent are only used in one institution, a result which is much the same as the share of once-only references in the "rst eight volumes of the Scandinavian Journal of Management, namely 89.3 per cent (Engwall, 1995). 4.3. Conclusions Our analysis of the present situation also seems to provide some support for our second proposition. Although we can see certain general patterns in the curricula

L. Engwall / Scand. J. Mgmt. 16 (2000) 1}24

19

across the four countries, there still seem to be national models. This is particularly true of Denmark, where students are o!ered a two-stage programme over 3#2 years. However, the schools in the other countries also appear to have more or less the same kind of curricula structure. In the case of the schools in Denmark and Finland this is also demonstrated by the overlap in the choice of literature. The evidence from Norway and Sweden, on the other hand, reveals stronger or equally strong links with other Nordic institutions. In relation to our earlier "ndings regarding the national character of accounting and "nance it is also interesting to note that of the books used at more than three institutions, half are in the sub-"eld of "nance.

5. Final conclusions This paper has analysed Nordic business schools in terms of two propositions regarding foreign role models and standardisation. In the case of role models we have found that many of the early Nordic business schools were modelled directly or indirectly on the Handelshochschulen in Germany, a country which at the time when the "rst schools were being founded was culturally close to the Nordic countries. A reminder of this relationship is that the Nordic business schools still use names that are translations of the German term. We also found that the early German in#uence was later replaced by a strong North American impact, demonstrated here by a rather high share of US text-books in Nordic literature lists. However, this in#uence is counterbalanced by almost as strong or sometimes even stronger national features in the curricula. This applies particularly to sub-"elds in which national institutional knowledge is required. At the same time we have seen that a few international books on "nance have been chosen by many of the Nordic schools. As regards standardisation we have found that existing academic institutions have provided important role models. Some of the Nordic business schools even started as non-academic institutions which were later upgraded to achieve academic status. Similarly we have noted how the schools have gradually adopted the attributes of the dominant academic institutions. We have also found certain similarities between leaders and followers with respect to the structure of curricula and the use of literature. However, the evidence here is less clear than in the case of our "rst proposition. Danish and Finnish business schools seem to provide stronger support for the proposition, particularly in terms of the national overlap in literature. For the Norwegian and Swedish schools the national literature links are weaker, while the structure of the curricula within the two countries is fairly similar. The overall implication of the conclusions reached appears to be that Nordic business education in the 1990s reveals a strong US in#uence, while at the same time the curricula exhibit certain national or perhaps even local features. However, these last may become weaker if international deregulation continues. Under such circumstances the institutional di!erences can be expected to diminish and, as a result, also the need for country-speci"c material. This is in fact what has happened in the

20

L. Engwall / Scand. J. Mgmt. 16 (2000) 1}24

sub-"eld of "nance. Markets have been deregulated and have become international. As a result a few US text-books have been able to capture the lead in the Nordic business schools. What is needed to counteract complete foreign domination is of course scholarly work on the part of the Nordic business administration faculties. In this way Nordic research and ideas could perhaps "nd an audience even outside the Nordic countries. Needless to say language barriers are an obstacle to the international di!usion of Nordic business administration knowledge. However, it should also be borne in mind that barriers of this kind also work the other way. For the foreseeable future Nordic institutions providing an academic business education are likely to be far better protected from international competition than institutions in English-speaking countries such as Australia. 6. Sources ABS: Fagbeskrivelse, Studievejledning, Pensumlister Vinterexamen 1995/96 HAstudiet and Cand. merc.-studiet (Subject Description, Study Guidance and Literature Lists for the HA and Cand.merc. Studies). CBS: HA Studieha> ndbog 94/95 (HA Study Manual 94/95), HA-studiet: EksamensPensumliste Vinter 1995/96, (HA-Studies: Literature List 1995/96), Cand. merc. Studieha> ndbog 96/97, (Cand. merc. Study Manual 96/97) and Cand. merc. Liniebeskrivelser 97/98 (Cand. merc. Programme Descriptions 97/98). HSE: General Description of the Helsinki School of Economics and Business Administration, and Course Lists. NSEB: Studieha> ndbok 1995/96 (Study Manual 1995/96), and Kurskatalog, H~stsemestret 1995 (NHH Course Catalogue Fall Semester 1995). NSM: Terminskatalog h~st 1995 (Catalogue for the Fall Semester 1995), Terminskatalog vinter og va> r 1996 (Catalogue for the Winter and Spring Semesters 1996) and Specialiseringskatalog og obligatoriske 4. klasse kurs (Catalogue for Specialisation). SSE: Course Lists Semester 1}8, 1995. SSEH: Studiehandbok 1996-97 (Study Manual 1996}97).

References Adler, N. J. (1991). International dimensions of organizational behaviour. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Albach, H. (1995). Walter Mahlberg * den foK rste foK retagsekonomiprofessorn i GoK teborg (Walter Mahlberg * the First Professor of Business Administration in Gothenburg). In L. Engwall, (Ed.), Fo( rega> ngare inom fo( retagsekonomin (Pioneers in business studies) (pp. 87}107) Stockholm: SNS . Amdam, R. P. (1993). For egen regning. BI og den ~ konomisk-administrative utdanningen 1943}1993 (On own account. NSM and the economic-administrative education 1943}1993). Oslo, Universitetsforlaget. Amdam, R. P. (Ed.) (1996). Management education and competitiveness. Europe, Japan and the United States. London: Routledge. Amdam, R. P., & Norstr+m, C. J. (1994). Business administration in Norway 1936}1990. In: L. Engwall, & E. Gunnarsson, (Eds.), Management studies in an academic context (pp. 66}83). Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis Studia Oeconomiae Negotiorum. Uppsala: Almqvist and Wiksell.

L. Engwall / Scand. J. Mgmt. 16 (2000) 1}24

21

Andersen, H. (Ed.) (1990). Videnskabsteori og metodl~ re: Bd 2: Erhvers~ konomi (Theory of science and methods: Vol. II: Business administration). Fredriksberg: Samfundslitteratur. Andersen, H. (Ed.) (1994). Videnskabsteori og metodl~ re: Bd 1: Introduktion (Theory of science and methods: Vol. I: Introduction). Fredriksberg: Samfundslitteratur. Anthony, R. N., & Govindarajan, V. (1995). Management control systems (8th ed.) Chicago, IL: Irwin. Arens, A. A., & Loebbecke, J. K. (1991). Auditing } an integrated approach (5th ed.). Englewood Cli!s, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Argyris, C. (1990). Overcoming organizational defences. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Barsoux, J.-L. (1989). Management education in France. In: W. Byrt, (Ed.), Management education. An international survey (pp. 120}150). London: Routledge. Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (1966). The social construction of reality: A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. Garden City, NY: Doubleday. Blunch, N. J. (1992). Anvendelse af markedsdata (The use of market data). Copenhagen: Busck. Borum, F., & Westenholz, A. (1995). The incorporation of multiple institutional models: Organizational "eld multiplicity and the role of actors. In: W. R. Scott, & S. Christensen, (Eds.), Advances in the institutional analysis of organizations: International and longitudinal studies (pp. 113}131). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Bourdieu, P. (1984). Homo academicus. Paris: Editions de Minuit. Bradley (1995). International marketing strategy (2nd ed.). London: Prentice-Hall. Brealey, R. A., & Myers, S.C. (1991). Principles of corporate xnance (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill. Burgelman, R. A., & Sayles, L.R. (1986). Inside corporate innovation; strategy, structure and managerial skills. New York: Free Press. Chandler, A. D. Jr. (1977). The visible hand. The managerial revolution in American business. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. Chandler, A. D. Jr. (1990). Scale and scope. The dynamics of industrial capitalism. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. Christensen, J. F. (1995). Produktinnovation } proces og strategi (Product innovation } process and strategy). Copenhagen: Nyt Nordisk Forlag Arnold Busck. Churchill, G. A. Jr., Ford, N.M., & Walker, Jr.O.C. (1993). Sales force management. Homewood, IL: Irwin. Cooper, R., & Kaplan, R. S. (1991). ¹he design of cost management systems. Englewood Cli!s, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Copeland. T. E., & Weston, J. F. (1988). Financial theory and corporate policy (3rd ed.). Reading, MA, Addison-Wesley. COSO (1992). International control-integrated framework. New York: Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. Cyert, R. M., & March, J. G. (1963). A behavioral theory of the xrm. Englewood Cli!s, NJ: Prentice-Hall. De Wit, B., & Meyer, R. (1994). Strategy: process, content, context. Minneapolis, MI: West Pub. Co. DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational "elds. American Sociology Review, 48(2), 147}160. Douma, S., & Schreuder, H. (1991). Economic approaches to organizations. London: Prentice-Hall. Drury, C. (1992). Management and cost accounting (3rd ed.). London: Chapman & Hall. Eiteman, D. K., Stonehill, A.I., & Mo!ett, M.H. (1994). Multinational business xnance (7th ed.). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Elton, E. J., & Gruber, M.J. (1995). Portfolio theory and investment analysis (5th ed.). New York: Wiley. Emmanuel, C., Otley, D., & Merchant, K. (1990). Accounting for management control (2nd ed.). London: Chapman & Hall. Engwall, L. (1992). Mercury meets Minerva. Oxford: Pergamon Press. Engwall, L. (1995). Management studies: A fragmented adhocracy? Scandinavian Journal of Management, 11(3), 225}235. Engwall, L. (1996). The Vikings vs. the World. An examination of nordic business research. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 12(4), 425}436. Engwall, L. (1998). Minerva's mistrust of Mercury. Exclusion in academia. In: A. D. Colin, and M.-C. & Hoock-Demarle (Eds.), ¸es Formes d'Exclusion. Paris: The University Press of Paris VII (forthcoming).

22

L. Engwall / Scand. J. Mgmt. 16 (2000) 1}24

Engwall, L., & Gunnarsson, E. (Eds.), (1994). Management studies in an academic context. Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis, Studia Oeconomiae Negotiorum 35, Uppsala: Almqvist and Wiksell. FAR:s samlingsvolym (1995). Stockholm: FAR. Fellman, S. (1994). Business school graduates in the industrialisation process } their role in large industrial "rms in the Nordic Countries in the Inter-War Period. Paper presented at the 11th International Economic History Congress, 11}16 September 1994, Milano, Italy (mimeo). Flint, D. (1988). Philosophy and principles of auditing. Basingstoke: Macmillan Education. Foster, G. (1986). Financial statement analysis. London: Prentice-Hall. Gadde, L. -E., & Ha> kansson, H. (1993). Professionellt inko( p (Professional Purchasing). Lund: Studentlitteratur. Gammelga> rd, S. (1989). Begyndelsen og udviklingen i de f+rste 23 a> r. Perioden 1939 til 1962 (The Beginning and the Development During the First 23 Years. The Period 1939 to 1962). Handelsh+jskolen i As rhus 50 a> r (The Aarhus Business School 50 Years), Aarhus, Handelsh+jskolen i As rhus, 20-31. Granick, D. (1972). Managerial comparisons of four developed countries. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. GroK nroos, K. (1990). Service management and marketing. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books. Gunnarsson, E. (1988). Fra> n Hansa till HandelshoK gskola. Svensk ekonomundervisning fram till 1909 (From the Hanseatic League to a School of Economics. Swedish Business Education up to 1909). Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis. Studia Oeconomiae Negotiorum 29, Stockholm, Almqvist and Wiksell International (thesis). Haugen, R. A. (1993). Modern investment theory. Englewood Cli!s, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Hickson, D. J. (Ed.) (1993). Management in Western Europe: Society, culture and organization in twelve nations. Berlin: De Gruyter. Hickson, D. J., & Pugh, D.S. (1995). Management worldwide. The impact of societal culture on organizations around the globe. Harmondsworth, Middlesex: Penguin. Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture's consequences: International diwerences in work-related values. Beverly Hill, CA: Sage. Hofstede, G. (1994). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. Intercultural cooperation and its importance for survival. London: Harper. Howell, J. E. (1971). Business education: Colleges. In: L.C. Deighton (Ed.), The encyclopedia of education (pp. 522}526). New York: MacMillan. Hull, J.C. (1993). Options, futures and other derivative securities (2nd ed.). Englewood Cli!s, NJ: PrenticeHall. Ha> kansson, H., & Snehota, I. (1995). Developing relationships in business. London: Routledge. Jensen, O. H., & Str+mme Svendsen, A. (1986). Norges Handelsh+yskole femti a> r (The Norwegian School of Economics and Business Administration Fifty Years). Bergen: Norges Handelsh+yskole. Jessen, J., & Nissen, S. (1995). Business studies in Denmark. In Evaluation, cooperation under ERASM;S and SOCRA¹ES's new perspectives. ¹raining and education in business studies, pp. 57}76. European National Reports. Brussels: SIGMA. Johansen, J., & Mitens, L. (1988). Analyse og diagnose (Analysis and diagnosis). Lyngby: Technical University of Denmark. Johanson, J., Associates (1994). Internationalization, relationships and networks. Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis. Studia Oeconomiae Negotiorum 36, Uppsala, Almqvist and Wiksell International. JoK nsson, S. (1995). Albert ter Vehn - aK mnesteoretisk och organisatorisk institutionsbyggare (Albert ter Vehn - Disciplinary and Organisational Institution Builder). In: L. Engwall (Ed.), FoK rega> ngare inom foK retagsekonomin (Pioneers in Busines Studies) (pp. 109}123). Stockholm: SNS. Kaplan, R. S., & Atkinson, A. A. (1989). Advanced management accounting. Englewood Cli!s, NJ: PrenticeHall. Katzenbach, J. R., & Smith, D. K. (1994). Tiimit ja tuloksekas yritys. Helsinki: Gummerus. Kipping, M. (1998). The hidden business schools. Management training in Germany since 1945. In L. Engwall & V. Zamagni (Eds.), Management education in an historical perspective (pp. 95}110). Manchester: Manchester University Press. Kotler, P. (1994). Marketing management. Analysis, planning, implementation and control (8th ed.). Englewood Cli!s, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

L. Engwall / Scand. J. Mgmt. 16 (2000) 1}24

23

Lange, O. (Ed.) (1992). Kampen for en h~jere laereanstalt (The "ght for an institution of higher education). Copenhagen: Handelsh+yskolens Forlag. Lambert, D. M., & Stock, J. R. (1993). Strategic logistics management. Homewood, IL: Irwin. Lawrence, P. (1989). Management education in West Germany. In W. Byrt (Ed.), Management education. An international survey (pp. 151}171). New York: Routledge. Leppiniemi, J. (1995a). Hyva( kirjanpitotapa. Helsinki: Weilin & GoK oK s. Leppiniemi, J. (1995b). Tilina( a( to( s- ja verosuunnittelu. Helsinki: Weilin & GoK oK s. Linderoth, H. m # (1994). Beskrivende o( konomi (Descriptive economics). Copenhagen: Jurist- og "konomforbundet. Loustarinen, R., & Welch, L. (1990). International business operations. Helsinki: Helsinki School of Economics. March, J. G., & Simon, H. A. (1958). Organizations. New York: Wiley. McKenna, J. F. (1989). Management education in the United States. In: W. Byrt (Ed.), Management education. An international survey (pp. 18}55). London: Routledge. Meyer, H. D. (1998). The German Handelshochschulen 1898}1930. A new departure in management education and why they failed. In L. Engwall & V. Zamagni (Eds.), Management education in an historical perspective (pp. 19}33). Manchester: Manchester University Press. Meyer, J., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 12(2), 340}363. Morgan, G. (1986). Images of organizations. (2nd ed. 1997) Beverly Hills: Sage. Ogden, S. (1992). China's unresolved issues (2nd ed.). Englewood Cli!s, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Otholm, C. A. et al. (1996). Dansk bankva( sen (Danish Banking). Copenhagen: FSRs forlag. Pedersen, F. (1995). Investeringsplanla( gning (Investment planning). Aarhus: Systime. Peter, J. P., & Olson, J. C. (1993). Consumer behaviour and marketing strategy (3rd ed.). Homewood, IL: Irwin. Pfe!er, J., & Salancik, G. (1978). The external control of organizations. A resource dependence perspective. New York: Harper and Row. Porter, M. E. (1980). Competitive strategy: Techniques for analyzing industries and competitors. New York: The Free Press. Powell, W. W., & DiMaggio, P. J. (Eds.) (1991). The new institutionalism in organizational analysis. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press. Rasmusson, L. (1985). Fyrtiotalisterna (The forties people). Stockholm: Norstedts. Reve, T., Lensberg, K., & GroK nhaug, K. (1992). Et konkurransedyktig Norge (A competitive Norway). Bergen: Tano. Riistama, V. (1995). Tilintarkastus. Helsinki: Weilin and GoK oK s. Ritzer, G. (1993). The McDonaldization of society. Newbury Park, CA: Pine Forge Press. Rombach, B., & Sahlin-Andersson, K. (Ed.) (1995). Fra> n sanningssoK kande till styrmedel. Moderna utvaK rderingar i o+entlig sektor (From a search of truth to means of control. Modern evaluations in the public sector). Stockholm: Nerenius and SanteH rus. Ryan, B., Scapens, W., & Theobald, M. (1992). Research method and methodology in xnance and accounting. New York: Academic Press. Scott, W. R. (1995). Institutions and organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Sims, D., Fineman, S., & Gabriel, Y. (1993). Organizing and organizations. London: Sage. Smith, W. C. Jr., Smithson, W. C., & Wilford, D. S. (1990). Managing xnancial risk. New York: Harper. Stern, L. W., & El-Ansary, A. I. (1995). Marketing channels (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Stewart, R., Barsoux, J.-L., Kieser, A., Ganter, H.-D., & Walgenbach, P. (1994). Managing in Britain and Germany. New York: St. Martin's Press. Sundin, E. (1983). AG mneskonferenser i foK retagsekonomi (Subject Conferences in Business Administration). Paper presented at the Nordic Conference in Business Administration in Copenhagen 24}27 August 1983, Department of Business Administration, Umea> University, mimeo. Thompson, J. D. (1967). Organizations in action. New York: McGraw-Hill. Vibvk, J., & Kobbernagel, J. (1980). Foreningen til ;nge Handelsmaends ;ddannelse 1880}1980 (The Association for the Education of Young Merchants 1880}1980). Copenhagen: Nyt Nordisk Forlag Arnold Busck.

24

L. Engwall / Scand. J. Mgmt. 16 (2000) 1}24

Vieru, M., & Sippola, K. (1995). Business studies in Finland. In Evaluation, cooperation under ERASM;S and SOCRA¹ES's new perspectives. ¹raining and education in business studies (pp. 111}129). European National Reports. Brussels: SIGMA. Wallace, S. W., & Cisternas, I. (1995). Business studies in Norway. In Evaluation, cooperation under ERASM;S and SOCRA¹ES's new perspectives. ¹raining and education in business studies (pp. 177}201). European National Reports. Brussels: SIGMA. Wallerstedt, E. (1988). Oskar SilleH n - Professor och praktiker. Na> gra drag i foK retagsekonomiaK mnets tidiga utveckling vid HandelshoK gskolan i Stockholm (Oskar SilleH n - Professor and Practioner. Some Aspects of the Early Development of Business Administration at the Stockholm School of Economics). Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis. Studia Oeconomiae Negotiorum 30, Stockholm, Almqvist and Wiksell International (thesis). Wallerstedt, E. (1995). Oskar SilleH n - banbrytare inom svensk foK retagsekonomi (Oskar SilleH n - Pioneer in Swedish Business Administration). In: L. Engwall (Ed.), FoK rega> ngare inom foK retagsekonomin (Pioneers in Business Studies) (pp. 67}86). Stockholm: SNS. Welford, R., & Gouldson, A. (1993). Environmental management and business strategy. London: Pitman. Westerlund, G. (1984). Svenska handelsho( gskolan. Asterblick pa> en 75-a> rig utveckling (The Swedish School of Economics. A Review of 75 Years). Helsinki: Stiftelsen Svenska HandelshoK gskolan. Whitley, R. (1984). The intellectual and social organization of the sciences. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Whitley, R. (Ed.) (1992a). European business systems: Firms and markets in their national contexts. London: Sage. Whitley, R. (1992b). Business systems in East Asia. Firms, markets and societies. London: Sage. Whitley, R., & Kristensen, P. H. (Eds.). (1996). The changing European xrm. London: Routledge. Whitley, R., & Kristensen, P. H. (Eds.). (1997). Governance at work: The social regulation of economic relations. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Whitley, R., Thomas, A., & Marceau, J. (1981). Masters of business?: Business schools and business graduates in Britain and France. London: Tavistock. WikstroK m, S., & Normann, R. (1994). Knowledge and value: A new perspective on corporate transformation. London: Routledge. Womack, J. P., Jones, D. T., & Roos, D. (1990). The machine that changed the world. New York: Rawson Associates. Yin, R. K. (1984). Case study research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Yukl, G. A. (1989). Leadership in organizations (2nd ed.). Englewood Cli!s, NJ: Prentice-Hall.