enterprises had been owned and controlled by individuals or families without any
managerial revolution or institutional structure. Managerial revolution can be said to
have begun in the mid 19th century when joint-stock companies began to emerge and over
time increasing numbers of investors held a share of ownership and received a portion of
With managerial revolution,
companies no longer had a single owner and managers emerged to control business
transformed the workplace and values other than profit entered into business calculations
and there would be greater harmony between workers and executives.
Since most managers have become
large stock holders (and thus owners) the significance of the managerial revolution has
been called into question.
The managerial revolution
represents the emergence of an institutional structure inherently superior for all times
and places to that of decentralized ownership and market exchange in all its forms.
Managerial revolution through
which specific governments sought to control costs and increase governability in the
public sector has been extended to NGOs.
revolution revisited: the moderating impact of top managers social class position -
Donald Palmer, Michael Maher, University of California, USA
This article draws on early sociological critiques of the managerialist thesis to develop
a new conceptualization of corporate ownership and control which is used here to inform an
analysis of the propensity of large corporations to complete diversifying acquisitions in
the 1960s. We categorize firms on the basis of the social class position of their top
managers, focusing primarily on three types of firms, those run by: established capitalist
owners, new capitalist owners and autonomous professional managers. We develop theoretical
arguments that lead to two sets of predictions. First, we predict that firms run by new
capitalist owners and autonomous professional managers exhibited a greater tendency than
firms run by established capitalist owners to complete diversifying acquisitions in the
1960s. Second, we predict that the relationship between a firms financial,
organizational and managerial capacities to pursue diversifying acquisitions, on the one
hand, and the rate at which it completed such acquisitions, on the other, was stronger
among firms run by new capitalist owners and autonomous professional managers than among
firms run by other types of top managers.
Loss of Shareholder
Control and the Managerial Revolution? Anders Brostrom, The Swedish Center
for Working Life
The debate on economic democracy has to some extent centered around the role of the
mandators within the enterprise. It has been an assumption since the work of Berle and
Means The Modern Corporation and Private Property - was published, that the separation of
ownership and control has meant a loss of control for the mandators. This article
discusses that thesis and claims that the company is still in the hands of the owners
through delegation and proxy. There is no such thing as a managerial revolution.
On Ownership and
Membership - Yohanan Stryjan, Stockholm and Uppsala University
The issue of ownership occupies a central place in research on selfmanagement. This
preoccupation has all but relegated other, no less central elements of self-management to
a residual role. The actual contribution of ownership is examined in two groups of cases
where worker ownership was grafted upon an existing organizational structure: a Swedish
sample of worker-owned firms and American ESOP schemes. The findings, buttressed by a
theoretical review of the mandator approach and of the managerial revolution thesis,
suggest that the conventional model of the self-managed enterprise as a 'firm owned by
workers', is theoretically inconsistent and yields, where followed in practice, highly
unsatisfactory results. The issue is then reexamined in a theoretical consideration of the
concept of ownership and of the way property rights approaches may be applied in the case
of complex, indivisible assets, such as an industrial plant.
Managers after the era of organizational restructuring towards a second managerial
revolution? Bill Martin
Managers careers and career orientations have changed significantly since the era of
organizational change that began around 20-30 years ago. This article focuses on how
managers have responded to these changes. It suggests a significant change in the kinds of
capital that managers mobilize, and the uses to which they put it. At least
some managers now mobilize a form of social capital in the form of reputations
that are grounded in informal networks. However, this reputational capital can be
difficult to stabilise and therefore risky to hold. Managers therefore attempt to convert
it into wealth - economic capital.
The Managerial Career after Downsizing: Case Studies from the `Leading Edge'
Patrick McGovern, London School of Economics
Veronica Hope-Hailey, Cranfield School of Management
Philip Stiles, University of Cambridge
This paper sets out to investigate whether the recent wave of organisational restructuring
has contributed to the further decline of the internally promoted manager or produced a
new model of managerial employment in large organizations. Our research, which is based on
in-depth case studies of eight major British-based employers, finds no evidence of the
kind of transformational change associated with the introduction of a new model.
A Marx for the Managerial Revolution: Habermas on Law and Democracy -
The early work of J´rgen Habermas stressed the corrosive effects of the state and the
market on the socio-cultural life-world. There could be no administrative creation of
meaning. His more recent work argues that the system can redeem itself without sacrificing
the emancipatory interests of humanity. However, this shift does not represent an
abandonment of the revolutionary project of critical theory. On the contrary, the
communicative model of proceduralist law-making is designed to promote the revolutionary
transformation of Western civilization under the auspices of managerial and administrative
elites. The radical ideal of cosmopolitan democracy becomes an essential ingredient in the
effective management of a complex socio-economic system operating on a global scale. The
demos in Habermas's vision of radical democracy is not the people of any particular nation
but humanity at large.
The promises of managerial revolution theory - Nodoushani O
Abstract: Posits that since the New Deal era, 1933-1940, the theory of managerial
revolution has sparked tremendous debate concerning the governance of the USAs large
corporations. Argues that an interpretation of The Modern Corporation and Private
Property, within the context of other works by Adolf Berle and Gardiner Means, could raise
profound insights in terms of a paradigm shift concerning the governance of big
corporations in contemporary economy.
The Managerial Revolution. Porter, John W.
Abstract: Changing demographic, economic, social, and political conditions are forcing a
managerial revolution upon the academy, resulting in an entirely new set of mechanisms
being put into place to maintain credibility and survival.