FINAL REPORT FROM CEMP

C E M P
The Creation of European Management Practice
A Research Programme Supported by the European Union
(TSER Contract SOE1-CT97-1072)
Executive Committee: Professor Lars Engwall, Sweden (chair), Professor José Luis Alvarez, Spain,
Professor Rolv Petter Amdam, Norway, Dr. Matthias Kipping, United Kingdom
Executive Secretary: Dr. Cecilia Pahlberg, Department of Business Studies, Box 513, SE-751 20 Uppsala, Sweden
telephone: +46-18-4711362; fax: +46-18-4716810; e-mail: Cecilia.Pahlberg@fek.uu.se
Home-page: http://www.fek.uu.se/cemp
FINAL REPORT
December 2001

TABLE OF CONTENT
TABLE OF CONTENT ........................................................................................................................................ 1
LIST OF FIGURES............................................................................................................................................... 4
LIST OF TABLES................................................................................................................................................. 4
ABSTRACT ........................................................................................................................................................... 5
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................... 6
1.1. BACKGROUND............................................................................................................................................... 6
1.2. METHODOLOGY............................................................................................................................................ 6
1.3. CONCLUSIONS .............................................................................................................................................. 8
1.3.1. Institutions of Management Knowledge and the Convergence of European Business Practice .......... 8
1.3.2. Differences between Different Parts of Europe ................................................................................. 10
1.3.3. The Importance of the European Dimension in the Research............................................................ 12
1.4. POLICY IMPLICATIONS................................................................................................................................ 13
1.5. DISSEMINATION AND EXPLOITATION OF RESULTS ...................................................................................... 15
2. BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES OF THE PROJECT....................................................................... 15
3. SCIENTIFIC DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT.................................................................................... 17
3.1. INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................................... 17
3.2. METHODOLOGY.......................................................................................................................................... 18
3.2.1. The Organisation of the Research...................................................................................................... 18
3.2.2. Deliverables ....................................................................................................................................... 19
3.2.3. Geographical Representation ............................................................................................................ 21
3.2.4. The Empirical Bases for the Deliverables.......................................................................................... 23
3.2.4.1. Published and Unpublished Documents.......................................................................................................23
3.2.4.2. Questionnaires..............................................................................................................................................26
3.2.4.2.1. Consulting............................................................................................................................................26
3.2.4.2.2. Media...................................................................................................................................................26
3.2.4.2.3. Education .............................................................................................................................................27
3.2.4.2.4. Practice ................................................................................................................................................27
3.2.4.3. Interviews.....................................................................................................................................................28
3.2.4.4. Observation..................................................................................................................................................29
3.2.5. Conclusions........................................................................................................................................ 29
3.3. RESULTS..................................................................................................................................................... 30
3.3.1. Co-evolution of Management Practice with Academia, Media and Consulting ................................ 30
3.3.1.1. Introduction..................................................................................................................................................30
3.3.1.2. The Evolution of Management Practice and Ideology .................................................................................31

3.3.1.3. The Fields of Management Knowledge in the Three Waves........................................................................35
3.3.1.3.1 Consulting.............................................................................................................................................35
3.3.1.3.2. Media...................................................................................................................................................38
3.3.1.3.3. Education .............................................................................................................................................40
3.3.1.4. Implications for Convergence ......................................................................................................................43
3.3.2. Structure: Polarisation within the Fields........................................................................................... 45
3.3.2.1. Introduction..................................................................................................................................................45
3.3.2.2. Fields of Knowledge and Domains of Action ..............................................................................................45
3.3.2.3. The Polarisation within Fields......................................................................................................................46
3.3.2.3.1. Consulting............................................................................................................................................47
3.3.2.3.2. Media...................................................................................................................................................48
3.3.2.3.3. Education .............................................................................................................................................49
3.3.2.3.4. Conclusion ...........................................................................................................................................51
3.3.2.4. The Decreasing Importance of the National Domain ...................................................................................51
3.3.2.4.1. Consulting............................................................................................................................................52
3.3.2.4.2. Media...................................................................................................................................................52
3.3.2.4.3. Education .............................................................................................................................................53
3.3.2.5. Implications for Convergence ......................................................................................................................54
3.3.3. Contents: Convergence, Adaptation and the Blurring of Borders ..................................................... 55
3.3.3.1. Introduction..................................................................................................................................................55
3.3.3.2. A Model of Convergence .............................................................................................................................55
3.3.3.3. A Model of Content Creation.......................................................................................................................57
3.3.3.4. Blurring of Boundaries and Networks of Relationships...............................................................................59
3.3.3.4.1. Consultancies and Academic Institutions ............................................................................................59
3.3.3.4.2. Consultancies and Media .....................................................................................................................62
3.3.3.5. Implications for Convergence ......................................................................................................................63
3.3.4. Diffusion: From Transfer to Intermediation ...................................................................................... 64
3.3.4.1. Introduction..................................................................................................................................................64
3.3.4.2. The Traditional View of the Diffusion of Management Knowledge............................................................65
3.3.4.3. Evidence against the Traditional View.........................................................................................................65
3.3.4.4. An Alternative View ....................................................................................................................................67
3.3.4.4.1. Legitimisation......................................................................................................................................67
3.3.4.4.2. Creation of a Common Language and its Translation..........................................................................69
3.3.4.5. Implications for Convergence ......................................................................................................................73
3.4. CONCLUDING REMARKS............................................................................................................................. 73
4. CONCLUSIONS AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS..................................................................................... 74
4.1. CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................................................................ 74
4.1.1. Institutions of Management Knowledge and the Convergence of European Business Practice ........ 74
4.1.2. Differences between Different Parts of Europe ................................................................................. 76
4.1.3. Theory Development .......................................................................................................................... 79
4.1.4. The Importance of the European Dimension in the Research............................................................ 80
4.2. FURTHER RESEARCH .................................................................................................................................. 80
4.3. POLICY IMPLICATIONS................................................................................................................................ 81
2

5. DISSEMINATION AND/OR EXPLOITATION OF RESULTS ................................................................ 83
5.1. INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................................... 83
5.2. CONFERENCES, WORKSHOPS AND SEMINARS............................................................................................. 83
5.3. DOCTORAL PROGRAMMES AND DISSEMINATION TO STUDENTS ................................................................. 87
5.4. PUBLICATIONS............................................................................................................................................ 87
5.5. WEB-SITE ................................................................................................................................................... 89
5.6. CONTINUATION AND FOLLOW-UP OF RESULTS ........................................................................................... 89
6. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS AND REFERENCES....................................................................................... 90
6.1. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................................................... 90
6.2. REFERENCES............................................................................................................................................... 90
7. ANNEXES........................................................................................................................................................ 97
7.1. CONFERENCES AND WORKSHOPS ARRANGED WITHIN THE PROGRAMME ................................................... 97
7.2. EXECUTIVE MEETINGS ............................................................................................................................... 98
7.3. CONFERENCE PRESENTATIONS BY CEMP RESEARCHERS........................................................................... 99
7.4. DISSEMINATION TO PRACTITIONERS ......................................................................................................... 107
7.5. DELIVERABLES......................................................................................................................................... 108
7.6. PUBLICATIONS.......................................................................................................................................... 109
7.6.1. Books................................................................................................................................................ 109
7.6.2. Dissertations .................................................................................................................................... 110
7.6.3. Special Issues................................................................................................................................... 110
7.6.4. Journal Articles................................................................................................................................ 110
7.6.5. Book Chapters.................................................................................................................................. 112
7.6.6. Book Reviews ................................................................................................................................... 114
7.6.7. Reports............................................................................................................................................. 114
7.7. PARTICIPANTS IN CEMP ACTIVITIES ....................................................................................................... 115
7.7.1. Track at the 14 th EGOS Colloquium in Maastricht, 9-11 July 1998 ................................................ 115
7.7.2. Workshop at IMD in Lausanne, 20-21 November 1998................................................................... 116
7.7.3. Co-ordination and Integration Meeting in Oslo, 23-25 April 1999................................................. 117
7.7.4. Track at the 15 th EGOS Colloquium in Warwick, 4-6 July 1999 ..................................................... 117
7.7.5. Track at the Nordic Conference on Business Studies in Helsinki, 19-21 August 1999 .................... 118
7.7.6. Workshop at SCANCOR, Stanford, 16-17 September 1999............................................................. 119
7.7.7. Workshop on Consultants, Reading, 15-16 October 1999............................................................... 120
7.7.8. Workshop on Management Education, Paris, 4-6 May 2000 .......................................................... 120
7.7.9 Conference on External Experts, Reading, 19-20 May 2000............................................................ 121
7.7.10. Round Table on Consultant-Client Relationships, Toulouse, 20 June 2000 .................................. 122
7.7.11. Summer School outside Helsinki, 25 June-1 July 2000.................................................................. 122
7.7.12. Track at the 16 th EGOS Colloquium in Helsinki, 2-4 July 2000..................................................... 123
7.7.13. Workshop on the Management Advice Industry, Brussels 17-18 November 2000......................... 124
7.7.14. Workshop on the Management Media Industry, Barcelona 1-3 December 2000 .......................... 125
3

7.7.15. Workshop on Implementation, Molde 4-6 May 2001 ..................................................................... 126
7.7.16. Track at the 17 th EGOS Colloquium in Lyon, 5-7 July 2001.......................................................... 126
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. The Organisation of the Research .......................................................................................................... 18
Figure 2. The Basic CEMP Model ........................................................................................................................ 30
Figure 3. A Model of Convergence....................................................................................................................... 56
Figure 4. A Model of Content Creation................................................................................................................. 58
Figure 5. The Blurring of Boundaries.................................................................................................................... 59
Figure 6. Management Knowledge in Networks of Relationships ........................................................................ 64
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. The Over All Research Design................................................................................................................ 18
Table 2. The Deliverables and the Research Design ............................................................................................. 20
Table 3. Geographical Coverage in the Empirical Studies.................................................................................... 22
Table 4. The Empirical Bases for the Deliverables ............................................................................................... 24
Table 5. Different Waves of Management Practice............................................................................................... 32
Table 6. The Evolution of the Consulting Industry ............................................................................................... 36
Table 7. Management Journals in Different Areas................................................................................................ 40
Table 8. Education of Top Managers in France, Germany and Norway (1968 and the 1990s)............................. 41
Table 9. Expansion of the Norwegian School of Management BI, Oslo 1985-2002............................................. 50
Table 10. Business Schools Accredited by EQUIS, May 2001............................................................................. 53
Table 11. Three Aspects of Idea Diffusion in Organisations................................................................................. 71
Table 12. Dimensions of the Consultancy Fields in Western Europe ................................................................... 78
Table 13. Participation in the Events Arranged by the Programme....................................................................... 84
Table 14. Country Coverage of Presentations by CEMP Researchers .................................................................. 86
Table 15. Publications by CEMP Researchers ...................................................................................................... 88
Table 16. Language of the Publications Published by CEMP Researchers........................................................... 89
4

ABSTRACT
The CEMP programme had three objectives: (1) to judge to what extent education, research
and consulting are contributing to a homogenisation in European business practice; (2) to determine
whether this homogenisation is more developed in some parts of Europe than in others;
and (3) to contribute to an improvement of the European dimension in the diffusion and
consumption of management knowledge.
In terms of the first objective CEMP research has shown that management practice has
evolved in waves, which differ significantly in terms of the dominant ideas, the focus of management
attention, and the role of top managers. One of the distinctive features of the most
recent wave is the polarisation of the structure within each of the three fields of the management
knowledge industry. While the national level is gradually losing influence, both the
global and the local levels are becoming more important. The research has also pointed to the
blurring of the boundaries of the fields of management. As a result there is a tendency for the
management knowledge industry as a whole to use the same labels and to diffuse similar ideas
thereby providing legitimation. At the discourse level there is therefore strong evidence for a
growing importance of the management knowledge industry in the promotion of convergence.
It especially contributes to the creation of a common management language and its translation
to a local context. For the latter, local actors play a significant role as translators for global
models. Overall consultants and parts of the media are the most important actors promoting
convergence.
In relation to the second objective CEMP research shows that there are certain differences
in the speed and extent of the convergence process in the various parts of Europe. These
differences are mainly driven by (1) the existence of global management knowledge institutions,
and (2) language capabilities in a given country. The United Kingdom therefore has
particularly advantageous conditions for the adoption of new management concepts and ideas.
Concerning other parts of Europe, the Scandinavian countries also appear to be fast to adapt
new management ideas due to a high fluency in English and the existence of global actors.
Germany and the Netherlands are also rapid to acquire new ideas due to the presence of
global actors, mainly consultants, and the availability of local translators. In France, however,
new concepts appear to be adopted later and to a lesser extent. The southern European countries
also show a diverse picture. While in Spain business schools and consultancies diffuse
new ideas to the large companies, there are doubts regarding the diffusion to small companies.
Like France, Italy appears to be less influenced by global management ideas, although there
are regional variations.
In relation to the third objective it is concluded that there is a strong need to promote
learning and diffusion of European best practices instead of depending on concepts developed
and packaged outside Europe. The diversity of management practices in itself is an important
model especially in the current network society. It should therefore be protected and promoted
within Europe and its transfer to other parts of the world should also be encouraged. For this
to happen management education is the most suitable because it is to a large extent located in
the public domain. There is therefore a need for co-ordination and co-operation at the European
level in order to further promote the circulation of faculty and students among European
management education institutions, the recognition of courses and degrees throughout Europe
as well as the use of European textbooks and other teaching materials. For the same reasons
there is a need for more research dealing with the realities of business in Europe. As the development
and diffusion of management practices are essential for European business, research
on European management innovation should be promoted within existing programmes
and possibly through special actions.
5

1.1. BACKGROUND
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The launching of the CEMP programme was based on the observation of the increasing influ-
ence on management practice of a management knowledge industry consisting of academic
management institutions, management media companies and management consultancies. This
circumstance and theoretical arguments of the new institutional school in organisation theory
made the research team to hypothesise that management practice is undergoing a process of
convergence. In order to investigate this hypothesis three main research objectives were for-
mulated within the programme. The first of these was to judge to what extent education, re-
search and consulting are contributing to a homogenisation in European business practice.
The second one was to determine whether this homogenisation is more developed in some
parts of Europe than in others. Third, and, finally, the programme had the objective to con-
tribute to an improvement of the European dimension in the diffusion and consumption of
management knowledge.
The programme has been a joint effort between four academic institutions. It has been
co-ordinated from the Department of Business Studies at Uppsala University, Sweden by Pro-
fessor Lars Engwall with the assistance of the Executive Secretary Dr. Cecilia Pahlberg. At
the three other partner institutions Professor Rolv Petter Amdam at the Norwegian School of
Management BI, Oslo, Norway has had the responsibility for the theme dealing with aca-
demic management institutions, while Professor José Luis Alvarez at IESE, Barcelona, Spain
has co-ordinated the theme on management media. Dr. Matthias Kipping at the University of
Reading, United Kingdom, has directed the theme on consultancies. The mentioned persons
have together constituted the Executive Group of the programme.
1.2. METHODOLOGY
The research within the programme has been organised in basically four phases. The first was
constituted by literature reviews within all themes except that on management media, while
the second focused on the structure of the various fields of the management knowledge indus-
try (academic management institutions, management media and management consultants). In
a third phase the team focused on the content of the services provided by the actors in the
mentioned fields, and in a fourth and final phase the research was directed towards the diffu-
sion of the services from the management knowledge industry to management practice.
6

In accordance with the contract with the European Union seventeen reports have been
delivered throughout the existence of the programme. Three early reports provided literature
reviews regarding management concepts (Report 1), academic management institutions (Re-
port 4), and management consulting (Report 2). One additional early report presented the re-
sults from a questionnaire study of the use and acquaintance of modern management concepts
in Swedish multinationals (Report 3). In the following three phases three reports were deliv-
ered by each of the different research teams: academic management institutions (Report 8, 12
and 14), management media companies (5, 9, 10 and 15) and management consultants (Re-
ports 6, 13 and 16). The results from all three phases were brought together in special reports
by the co-ordinating team (Reports 7, 11 and 17).
Since the programme aimed at comparisons between European countries studies were
undertaken in a large number of nations. These have been undertaken by members of the re-
search team as well as by colleagues in the various countries. On several occasions the schol-
ars undertaking these studies have been brought together at conferences and seminars within
the CEMP programme for the exchange of information and ideas. The mentioned approach
has implied that – although it has not been possible to cover all or the same countries for each
theme and each step of the research – the different teams have been able to systematically
provide evidence from Northern, Middle and Southern Europe.
The character of the research problem has implied that a variety of data sources have
been used throughout the programme. In terms of the research on the structure of the various
fields of the management knowledge industry all teams have taken advantage of published
and unpublished documents. Although such material has been very useful for the research it
have sometimes involved problems due to difficulties of making comparisons. This has par-
ticularly been the case as statistics from various countries have been analysed as the institu-
tions under study are not always clearly defined and sometimes are defined differently in
various European countries. As the programme moved on to content the research teams em-
ployed, in addition to published and unpublished documents, a questionnaire, interviews and
even observation. Questionnaires and interviews were also used in the last phase of the pro-
gramme. All in all, the empirical work within the programme has produced a rich database,
which has facilitated a better understanding of the management knowledge industry in various
European countries.
7

1.3. CONCLUSIONS
1.3.1. Institutions of Management Knowledge and the Convergence of European Business
Practice
CEMP research has shown that management practice has evolved in waves, which differ sig-
nificantly in terms of the dominant ideas, the focus of management attention, and the role of
top managers. A first wave occurred in the period from the 1880s to the 1970s with a major
expansion between the 1920s and the 1950s. The focus during that period was on the produc-
tion unit and the dominant ideology was scientific management developed by Frederick W.
Taylor. During this wave the role of the top manager was primarily that of a specialist. How-
ever, already in the 1920s a second wave started, although its major expansion did not occur
until the period from the 1960s to the 1980s. In this wave the focus was moved from the pro-
duction unit to the corporation. The dominant ideology concerned strategy and structure rather
than scientific management, and the main proponent of the ideology was Peter F. Drucker.
The role of the manager was no longer that of a specialist but that of a generalist. This wave
has not yet finished, although it is on the decline. The most recent shift has emerged in the last
two decades and became increasingly dominant during the 1990s. In this period the emphasis
started to shift from corporate organisation and strategy towards the management of internal
and external relationships. The co-ordination and control of such intra- and inter-
organisational networks is partly enabled through the fast development of information tech-
nology. A number of new management practices, concepts and tools have rapidly evolved at
the same time, as there has been a tremendous rise of the management knowledge industry.
However, there are differences between the fields in terms of their reaction to the changes in
management practice. While popular management publications and consulting seem to be first
in capturing new trends, there is more inertia when it comes to academic publications and
management education.
One of the distinctive features of the most recent wave is the polarisation within each
of the three fields of the management knowledge industry. While the national level is gradu-
ally losing influence, the global and the local levels are becoming more important. On the
global level each field is characterised by the emergence of large and highly visible actors
pushing for convergence. CEMP data show that consultants and a few media conglomerates
are most advanced in terms of acting on a global level. There are also a few international
business schools. However, in general, management education remains nationally driven. At
8

the same time, parts of the management knowledge industry, especially the small consultan-
cies, are very active on the local level.
When it comes to content, the research points to a gradual blurring of the boundaries
of the fields. The blurring occurs because some actors belong to several fields and the fields
are increasingly overlapping. For instance, consultants have started to co-operate with busi-
ness schools by organising joint events. At the same time business school are offering consult-
ing-type services in the form of tailor-made programmes for specific companies. Media com-
panies have also expanded their education-related activities. Some publishing companies have
started to organise training events. They are also influencing education through ranking of
business schools. In the same way companies are increasingly influencing educational institu-
tions through external academic funding and the participation in accreditation projects. As a
result of all these developments, there is a tendency for the management knowledge industry
as a whole to use the same labels and to diffuse similar ideas.
In terms of diffusion, CEMP research confirms the importance of management educa-
tion, media and consulting. However, their function is not limited to the transfer of manage-
ment knowledge. In the third wave of management practice companies have to defend their
action in relation to various internal and external stakeholders, especially players on the
global financial markets. The legitimisation function of the different institutions within the
management knowledge industry has therefore increased significantly. At the discourse level
there is also strong evidence for a growing importance of these institutions in the promotion
of convergence. They especially contribute to the creation of a common management lan-
guage and its translation to a local context. For the latter, local actors play a significant role as
translators for global models.
Overall it is clear that consultants and parts of the media are the most important actors
promoting convergence. They do this by diffusing standardised labels globally and by trans-
lating them into local and national contexts. In comparison education is still dominated by
national institutions, which means that they have less of influence on the convergence proc-
ess. Due to the blurring of boundaries the labels and underlying ideas are becoming increas-
ingly similar across all of the institutions. However, despite these strong tendencies for con-
vergence, there is considerable room for variation at the organisational level. This is due to
the possibility of actors to de-couple labels from practice as well as the translation occurring
at local levels. In this context it should be noted that neither de-coupling nor translation are
necessarily smooth and uncontested processes.
9

CEMP research also shows that most of the dominant and visible actors at the global
level in consulting and media, but to a more limited extent in education, are of American ori-
gin and ownership. This means that the role models and the providers of labels and underlying
ideas for European actors are coming from the United States. The main role of the European
actors seems to be the translation of these labels and ideas into the local context. Thus, some
of the ideas originating in European management practice might be packaged and sold back to
Europe by dominant US actors in the management knowledge industry. The fact that most
ideas are packaged in the United States might also be behind the extent of de-coupling and the
friction occurring in the translation process in Europe.
1.3.2. Differences between Different Parts of Europe
Concerning education the programme has primarily categorised different regions in Europe
according to how they have responded to the influence for the American system of manage-
ment education (Engwall and Zamagni, 1998). It is those parts of Europe that first developed
their own indigenous traditions in business education that show the largest resistance to the
American model. The pre-eminent example is Germany, with its own tradition of business
economics. In Germany the modern MBA programmes have not gained any strong influence
in the German business schools (Handelshochschulen). Another example of a country that has
shown resistance to the US system is France.
Countries where the American model has been regarded as a challenge to university
education constitute another group. Italy and Spain are among those countries. A third group
consists of countries where the American model has contributed to change a German model.
The Nordic countries have gradually adopted the American business administration model
within an organisational setting based on the German model. Also the Netherlands show a
dual pattern by adopting both the German and American models within university structures.
Finally, the last category is the late adopters of the American model. UK plays a significant
role within that category, since UK is the country where the MBA programmes have ex-
panded most rapidly in Europe.
Since media is a highly heterogeneous field – general and specialised newspapers,
academic research publications (books and journals) and university textbooks, magazines,
popular books, etc. – the strategy of the CEMP research has been to examine in-depth three
countries of different European business systems: (1) Denmark (as representative of Nordic
business systems), (2) the United Kingdom, and (3) Italy (complemented with data from
France and Spain as representation of the Southern European system). Regarding the structure
10

of the field (types of media and relationships among types), it seems remarkably equivalent
across business systems. In each of the countries studied there are one or two well-established
newspapers specialised in business and economics with significant circulation, and a number
of other specialised periodicals selling far fewer copies. All the important general newspapers
carry sections on management. In each of the countries studied there are also one or two
weeklies or monthlies usually patterned both in layout and content after the US examples of
Business Week or Fortune.
The United Kingdom is the only country whose periodicals enjoy a wide readership in
other European countries, de facto becoming, European publications. However, they never
reach the circulation of the national business newspapers. At the same time they act as role
models for the national business periodicals in terms of design and content. Similarly, in book
publishing there are some trends towards the emergence of a few dominant European actors
such as Pearson.
Despite national ownership of most media companies there are some indications for
the increasing similarity of content. Business, management and economic matters have be-
come an important part of the information available through the press, both daily and periodi-
cal. In the three countries explored, the “explosion” of the importance of these topics occurred
in a similar point in time (mid-1980’s), with an ideological celebration of market forces and a
sort of popular capitalism, both through entrepreneurship and through easier access to stock
exchanges. In sum, there is a very high structural equivalence in the media, and increasing
convergence of content across European business systems.
In terms of the consulting field, CEMP research has revealed considerable differences
in terms of the supply and the consumption of consultancy services in different parts of
Europe. The results suggest broadly a North-South divide, with Germany, the Netherlands,
the Nordic countries and the Untied Kingdom showing a significant level of consulting activi-
ties relative to their GDP. Among the southern European countries consulting activities ap-
pear highest in Spain. This means that large companies in these countries have fairly easy and
rapid access to new management concepts through the consultancies – a fact confirmed by
case study research. In terms of convergence, we also need to take into account factors deter-
mining the speed and extent to which these concepts are subsequently diffused throughout
these economies. Here we need to look at the concentration of consultancy markets (where a
low level indicates the presence of many small, usually locally based consultancies) and the
reach of the consultants (where a high value suggests that consultancies also count many
small and medium sized companies among their clients). According to these criteria, new
11

management concepts can be expected to diffuse most widely in Germany, the Nordic coun-
tries, the Netherlands and Italy.
Combining these two observations, we can therefore conclude that new management
concepts will disseminate quickly and widely in Germany, the Nordic countries and the Neth-
erlands. In the United Kingdom and Spain, they will also be received fairly rapidly, but their
use will largely remain confined to a few, especially international companies. The situation in
France and Italy is somewhere in the middle, because new management concepts are likely to
reach them later. In the Italian case, though, subsequent convergence is likely to occur fairly
quickly, especially in the more developed regions of the country, due to the presence of many
small, locally based consultancies.
Overall CEMP research shows that there are certain differences in the speed and ex-
tent of the convergence process in the various parts of Europe. The results indicate that these
differences are mainly driven by (1) the existence of global management knowledge institu-
tions, and (2) language capabilities in a given country. The United Kingdom therefore has
particularly advantageous conditions for the adoption of new management concepts and ideas.
Due to its strong position in management education and publishing the London based institu-
tions are spreading new ideas inside and outside Europe.
Concerning other parts of Europe, the Scandinavian countries appear to be fast to
adapt new management ideas due to a high fluency in English and the existence of global ac-
tors. In middle Europe, Germany and the Netherlands are also rapid to acquire new ideas due
to the presence of global actors, mainly consultants, and the availability of local translators. In
France, however, new concepts appear to be adopted later and to a lesser extent. The southern
European countries also show a diverse picture. While in Spain business schools and consul-
tancies diffuse new ideas to the large companies, there are doubts regarding the diffusion to
small companies. Like France, Italy seems to be less influenced by global management ideas,
although there are regional variations.
1.3.3. The Importance of the European Dimension in the Research
The focus of the CEMP programme on the creation of European management practice has of
course implied that the European dimension has been central in the research. The studies un-
dertaken have thus covered a large number of European countries. This has been accom-
plished through a co-operation with sub-contractors and colleagues throughout Europe. This
means that representatives from most countries within the European Union – with the excep-
tion of Belgium, Luxembourg and Greece – have been involved in the programme in one way
12

or another. In addition, persons from non-member European countries (Norway and Switzer-
land) and non-European countries (Australia, Canada, Israel, New Zealand, Turkey and the
United States) have participated in CEMP events. This has no doubt implied a communication
of European ideas to a wide audience.
Also in terms of the presentation of the research results CEMP researchers have suc-
ceeded to cover most of the European countries. Of the more than one hundred presentations
about one-third were made in Northern Europe, and one-third in mid-European countries,
while about one-sixth each was made in Southern Europe and overseas, respectively.
It can thus be no doubt that the CEMP programme has had a strong European dimen-
sion. This has been true both in terms of the object of study – the creation of European man-
agement practice – and in terms of collaboration between scientists and dissemination of re-
search results. For the CEMP team this has been a most rewarding experience.
1.4. POLICY IMPLICATIONS
In relation to the third objective of the CEMP programme – i.e. to contribute to an improve-
ment of the European dimension in the diffusion and consumption of management knowledge
– CEMP research suggests that there is a strong need to promote learning and diffusion of
European best practices instead of depending on concepts developed and packaged outside
Europe. This conclusion results from the finding that there are strong forces for convergence
of management practice based on labels and ideas that originated in the United States. A prob-
lem for managers in European companies is therefore that these labels and ideas are not nec-
essarily appropriate for the every-day practice in their companies. As a consequence of this,
one of the roles of the knowledge management industry in Europe is the translation of con-
cepts developed and labelled overseas to a local context. The more remote these labels and
ideas are from the contexts where they are supposed to be applied, the more difficult it is to
use them without major translations. Obviously, this is not an efficient process, because such
translations are usually costly in terms of human and financial resources.
Due to the dominance of American actors and ideas the wide range of European man-
agement best practices goes largely unnoticed. This variety provides an excellent source for
organisational learning and development. Currently this potential is not realised. Our most
important suggestion is therefore to find ways to take advantage of the available ideas in
Europe and encourage their dissemination. The diversity of management practices in itself is
an important model especially in the current network society. It should therefore be protected
13

and promoted within Europe and its transfer to other parts of the world could also be encour-
aged.
In order to realise the above-mentioned potential for organisational learning and de-
velopment from European best practices there is a need to use the best-suited existing institu-
tions and to develop alternative means of dissemination. Among the types of institutions ex-
amined in CEMP research consulting and media are difficult to influence by public policies,
since they act on open markets. By contrast management education institutions are more suit-
able because they to a large extent are located in the public domain. However, they are still
dominated by national rather than Europe-wide interests and policies. In order to take advan-
tage of the above-mentioned variety there is a need for co-ordination and co-operation at the
European level. Although a number of steps have been taken in Europe to create the possibili-
ties for faculty and students to circulate among European management education institutions,
we suggest these initiatives are given more attention and resources. Priority should, for in-
stance, be given to the efforts to establish the recognition of courses and degrees throughout
Europe. Further, management degree programmes taking place in more than one country
should be encouraged. We also suggest that the production as well as the use of European
textbooks and other teaching materials should be promoted.
For the same reasons as above, we emphasise the need for more research dealing with
the realities of business in Europe. The European Union has for a long time supported re-
search on technical innovations. As the development and diffusion of management practices
are essential for European business, we also suggest that research on European management
innovation should be promoted within existing programmes and possibly through special ac-
tions. These programmes should be based on a close co-operation between academia and the
European business community.
In addition to promoting European management education and research it is also nec-
essary to develop and support other arenas where management ideas can be exchanged and
further developed. This can take place both in more formally organised European professional
organisations and through informal gatherings such as round-tables and other loosely struc-
tured networks. Attempts should be made to widely diffuse the ideas generated in these fo-
rums through a close co-operation with European media companies particularly the popular
management press.
An important precondition for these learning and dissemination activities is language
proficiency. A central issue is therefore to actively support and promote language capabilities
in all European countries.
14

1.5. DISSEMINATION AND EXPLOITATION OF RESULTS
An important philosophy within the CEMP programme has been to put research results under
scrutiny through examination at conferences, workshops, and seminars and through publica-
tion review processes. Papers have been presented in a wide variety of disciplines, including
management and organisation studies, international business and business history. The vari-
ous events organised by the programme have also provided significant empirical input.
During its existence the programme has organised all together 16 conferences, work-
shops and seminars. All in all, these events have attracted 231 individuals from 115 institu-
tions in 21 countries. Since some persons have participated in more than one event, the total
number of participations is almost 400. In terms of geographical representation, persons from
most countries in the European Union have been involved in the events. Presentations have
also been made to practitioners. In addition activities for doctoral students have been organ-
ised in the form of a summer school, course activities, etc.
In addition to the seventeen reports delivered to Brussels the results from the pro-
gramme have been disseminated by CEMP researchers through 58 publications already pub-
lished and in 20 publications which are in press. Seven of these are books, four dissertations
and two special issues of academic journals. In addition there are 30 articles, 24 book chap-
ters, two book reviews and nine reports. Already in 1998 six publications came out of the pro-
gramme and the following three years 17, 19 and 16 publications appeared. A publication
record on this level is expected in 2002.
The CEMP programme has created a high level of visibility and its results have stimu-
lated considerable discussion. Although the project has now formally come to its end, the
network of people involved will have several opportunities to meet and continue the work on
the research issues it has developed. The Special Working Group within EGOS will continue
its work. In 2002 José Luis Alvarez will even be the main responsible for the EGOS meeting
in Barcelona 4-7 July 2002. At this meeting the Special Working Group created in relation to
the CEMP programme will host the sub-theme “Management Ideas and Organizational Poli-
tics”. In addition the CEMP group plans further research.
2. BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES OF THE PROJECT
The launching of the CEMP programme was based on the observation of the increasing atten-
tion paid to the improvement of management competence particularly in large corporations.
This had been, and still is, manifested in a rapid expansion of management education, man-
15

agement research and management consulting which in turn has resulted in a fast develop-
ment of a “management knowledge industry”. It was observed that within this industry, as
well as in management practice, a large number of management concepts and models ema-
nated from the United States. This appeared particularly worth noting in relation to contin-
gency approaches stressing the significance of context for the efficient use of different organ-
isational tools. Nevertheless, American models seem to be used in contexts considerably dif-
ferent from that of the United States. From a European perspective, it was therefore consid-
ered to be of special interest to study to what extent such management technology is diffused
in the European context, consisting of a variety of legal systems, industrial structures, cultural
traditions etc.
The two basic research questions in the application for the project were: (1) To what
extent has modern management technology been diffused in various European countries? and
(2) What messages have been communicated through this diffusion process?. In particular, the
aim was to study to what extent European management practices are becoming “American-
ised”. A basic assumption was also that three major carriers – graduates, publications and
consultants – diffuse management knowledge. The main research objectives were:
To judge to what extent education, research and consulting are contributing to a
homogenisation in European business practice.
To determine whether this homogenisation is more developed in some parts of
Europe than in others.
To contribute to an improvement of the European dimension in the diffusion and
consumption of management knowledge.
A starting point for the programme was the view that management education, research, con-
sulting and practice interplay and that management concepts and techniques are transferred to
practice through the three above-mentioned carriers. During the contract negotiations, the
importance of multinational companies (MNCs) was emphasised and MNCs were included as
a fourth carrier because of their significance for the diffusion and consumption of manage-
ment knowledge. In order to achieve the above-mentioned objectives, the research design
outlined three phases focusing on (1) the structure and the role of the significant carriers, (2)
the content communicated through these carriers, and (3) the diffusion of management knowl-
edge (see further below Section 3.1).
16

Important sources of inspiration for the programme were two influential schools in
organisation studies, i.e. the new institutional theory and the business systems approach.
While the first provides arguments for convergence the latter can be seen as a proponent for
heterogeneity and divergence.
According to the new institutional theory (see e.g. DiMaggio and Powell, 1983; Meyer
and Rowan, 1977; Powell and DiMaggio, 1991; Scott, 1995) organisations are under pressure
to become similar due to coercion, norms and imitation. Coercion is primarily exercised
through rules imposed by nation states, while norms constitute a significant force for homog-
enisation within professional fields. Imitation, finally, is important for convergence in uncer-
tain environments, where dominant actors tend to provide role models for other actors in the
field.
According to the business system approach, on the other hand, the formation of social
groups and institutions differs among countries. The country- and culture-specific contexts in
which management practices evolve are seen largely shaped by the cultural and institutional
framework of each country (cf. Hofstede, 1980; Whitley, 1992; Whitley and Kristensen,
1997; Whitley, 1999). Firms are for instance highly dependent on differing systems of politi-
cal governance (Putnam, Leonardi and Nanetti, 1993), corporate governance (Roe, 1994;
Zysman, 1983), selection of elites (Bourdieu, 1989), and religion (Guillén, 1994). A conse-
quence of this view is that the managing of a firm in Germany, for instance, can be expected
to be very different from managing one in France or in Great Britain (Maurice, Sellier and
Silvestre, 1986).
3.1. INTRODUCTION
3. SCIENTIFIC DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT
The over all design of the programme has been a matrix structure with two dimensions (see
Table 1). First, the four different carriers of management ideas – graduates, publications, con-
sultants and multinationals – constituted the foundation of the themes of the programme. Sec-
ond, as mentioned above, for each of these themes three stages of research were pursued:
structure, content and diffusion.
17

Table 1. The Over All Research Design
Graduates
Publications
Consultants
Multinationals
Carrier Structure Content Diffusion
The matrix shown in Table 1 will also be the basis for the presentation of the methodology
and the research results in this section. The methodology section (Section 3.2) will cover dif-
ferent aspects of the data collection and data analysis by using the matrix. The section
presenting the results (Section 3.3) will deal with the three phases of the research: structure,
content and diffusion. In each of the sections results on the different institutions associated
with the carriers will be elaborated on.
3.2. METHODOLOGY
3.2.1. The Organisation of the Research
On the basis of the design summarised in Table 1 the research was organised in four different
teams with a responsible co-ordinator for each (see Figure 1). Together with the Executive
Secretary Dr. Cecilia Pahlberg these co-ordinators have formed the Executive Group of the
project. This group has usually had their meetings in order to discuss issues related to the co-
ordination and further development of the project in connection with CEMP conferences,
seminars and workshops (see further Annexes 7.1 and 7.2).
Figure 1. The Organisation of the Research
Rolv Petter Amdam
Theme Co-ordinator
Graduates
Lars Engwall
Main Co-ordinator
of the Programme
Multinationals
José Luis Alvarez
Theme Co-ordinator
Publications
18
Matthias Kipping
Theme Co-ordinator
Consultants

The main co-ordinator of the project and chairman of the Executive Group has been
Professor Lars Engwall at Uppsala University, Sweden. A significant part of the work on the
project by the Uppsala team has thus been devoted to the integration of the programme. In
addition, the team has provided studies on multinationals and input to the other themes.
The team on graduates has been co-ordinated by Professor Rolv Petter Amdam at the
Norwegian School of Management in Oslo, Norway, while Professor José Luis Alvarez at
IESE in Barcelona, Spain has been responsible for the publication theme. Dr. Matthias Kip-
ping at the University of Reading, UK, finally, has headed the consultancy theme. All the four
teams have during the project collaborated with scholars from other institutions through sub-
contracting and exchange of information in various ways.
The limitation of partners to four has indeed been an advantage since communication
within the group has been quite easy to develop and sustain. There has been frequent interac-
tion through the Internet, but as mentioned above, the members have also met regularly. From
the very beginning of the project, a main strategy of the group has been to organise workshops
and conferences. These events have been of great value in order to gather data and to dissemi-
nate results among a large number of researchers (see further below Section 5.2 and Annexes
7.1 and 7.7). It is quite clear that the programme has created a network of people interested in
CEMP-related issues. It contains a wide variety of people of different nationalities and back-
grounds, circumstances that have stimulated discussions and increased the number of perspec-
tives.
As the programme progressed it turned out that it would be appropriate to focus more
on the institutions than on the carriers. Therefore the graduate theme was eventually re-
labelled academic institutions, the publications theme media and the consultants theme con-
sultancies. In addition the task of the Uppsala team turned out to be not only to focus on mul-
tinationals but on practice in a general sense through the interaction between academic
institutions, media, consultancies and practice. In the following we will therefore refer to the
four themes as academic institutions, media, consultancies and practice.
3.2.2. Deliverables
The contracted output of the programme has been literature reviews followed by reports from
the different phases of the four teams, in all seventeen reports (see Table 2 and Annex 7.5). A
first step was to identify significant management practices through an extensive literature re-
view (Report 1, i.e. Lindvall, 1998). In the same way the teams studying academic institutions
and consultancies delivered reviews (Reports No. 2 and 4, i.e. Kipping and Armbrüster, 1998
19

and Amdam and Kvålshaugen, 1999), while no such review was commissioned for media. On
the basis of these literature reviews, studies regarding the structure of management oriented
academic institutions, media and consultancies were reported on in Reports No. 5, 6 and 8
(Alvarez, Mazza and Mur, 1999; Kipping and Armbrüster, 1999 and Byrkjeflot, 1999a). Re-
port 7 (Engwall, 1999) provided an integration of the first phase of the programme.
Table 2. The Deliverables and the Research Design
Field Review Structure Content Diffusion
Academic institutions Report 4 Report 8 Report 12 Report 14
Media Not planned Report 5 Reports 9, 10 Report 15
Consultancies Report 2 Report 6 Report 13 Report 16
Practice Report 1 Report 7 Reports 3, 11 Reports 3, 17
The second step focused on the content of the products delivered by the different insti-
tutions. Among the reports already an early one (Report 3, i.e. Lindvall and Pahlberg, 1998)
provided evidence on content aspects in multinationals. The second phase also differed from
the first in that the media team delivered two reports, one on academic publications (Report 9,
i.e. Svejenova and Alvarez, 1999) and another (Report 10, i.e. Alvarez and Mazza, 2000) on
popular media. The integration of the findings of the second phase was provided in Report 11
(Engwall and Pahlberg, 2001a).
The third step dealt with the interaction between the institutions providing manage-
ment ideas and organisations employing such principles. The three teams working on aca-
demic institutions, media and consultancies delivered one report each (Reports 14, 15 and 16;
i.e. Kvålshaugen, 2001; Mazza and Alvarez, 2001; Kipping, 2001), while the Uppsala team
integrated the findings in Report 17 (Engwall and Pahlberg, 2001b). Also for this phase find-
ings in Report 3 (Lindvall and Pahlberg, 1999) were relevant.
In terms of the delivery of the reports the European Union has granted a few devia-
tions from the original contract. First, it was agreed that the integrative reports (7, 11 and 17,
i.e. Engwall, 1999, Engwall and Pahlberg 2001a and 2001b) could be delivered after the rele-
vant reports from the three other themes. Second, in the last phase an extension of the pro-
gramme for an additional nine months, within the same budget, was granted. The main reason
for this extension was the appropriateness to take advantage of the output from the large num-
20

er of conferences and seminars arranged in relation to the CEMP programme (see Annex
7.1). With these modifications all seventeen reports have been delivered to Brussels on time.
3.2.3. Geographical Representation
The co-ordinators of the programme come from four different European countries: Norway,
Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom. For natural reasons the empirical evidence from
these countries have been more extensive than from other countries. However, serious efforts
have been undertaken in order to broaden the geographical representation in the empirical
studies. At the outset it was even an ambition to cover as many as ten European countries in a
systematic way for all themes. However, cost considerations and lack of suitable collaborators
in some countries prevented the realisation of this idea. Nevertheless, the programme has been
able to cover a Northern, Middle and Southern European cluster for almost all the cells of the
research design matrix (Table 3). In addition, papers presented at workshops, seminars and
conferences have been based on studies from a very large number of European countries (see
further below Section 5.2 and Annex 7.1).
It is evident from Table 3 that there are variations between the different themes. The
theme dealing with academic institutions has primarily concentrated on comparisons between
the Northern (Norway) and the Middle (France and Germany) part of Europe, but some data
have also been obtained from Italy, Spain and Turkey. Although a deeper coverage of the
South had been welcome, resource considerations made this concentration necessary. It could
also be added that the focus on France and Norway has provided an opportunity to make a
comparison between two societies with different degrees of elitism.
The media theme has covered all regions in all studies with the exception of the Mid-
dle Europe in the diffusion part. For the content part studies of Europe as a whole have been
made. These studies have also included comparisons with the United States.
The consultants theme has covered all the regions in all studies. Particularly in the first
part a large number of European countries were covered: three in the North, four in the Mid-
dle and three in the South. In terms of content the theme concentrated on a limited number of
countries from each of the regions, while the last part included seven countries.
The Uppsala team has used data based on the above geographical sampling for the
integration part. In addition studies have been undertaken primarily with Swedish multina-
tionals. Their operations on a large number of markets may imply that the results have a
higher degree of generality.
21

Table 3. Geographical Coverage in the Empirical Studies
Theme Region Structure Content Diffusion
Academic Institutions North Denmark
Norway
Sweden
Denmark
Norway
Middle Germany France
South Italy
Spain
Germany
The Netherlands
UK
Italy
Spain
Turkey
Media a North Denmark Included in a comparison
between the United
States and Europe
Middle France
South Italy
The Untied Kingdom
Spain
Consultancies North Denmark
Practice b North
Norway
Sweden
Middle France
South Italy
Middle
South
Germany
The Netherlands
The United Kingdom
Portugal
Spain
All the above mentioned
countries were covered
in the integration reports
Included in a comparison
between the United
States and Europe
Included in a comparison
between the United
States and Europe. In
addition a case on Spain
Norway
France
Germany
-
Denmark
Finland
Sweden
-
Italy
Sweden Norway
Germany
Austria
France
Italy Italy
All the above mentioned
countries were covered
in the integration reports
Footnotes: a The studies of diffusion in the media group also included Israel and New Zealand.
Germany
The Netherlands
The United Kingdom
Portugal
Spain
b The practice part provided an integration of the results from the other three themes.
22
All the above mentioned
countries were covered
in the integration reports

The geographical representation presented above permits certain comparisons between
countries and regions within Europe. In addition the programme has examined developments
and patterns leading to pan-European activities in each of the four fields. Examples are the
European management education accreditation system EQUIS (see Hedmo, 1998, 1999, 2001
and 2002), the development of European ranking systems of business schools (see Wedlin,
2000), European academic journals (Report 9, i.e. Svejenova and Alvarez, 1999), and the
cross-border mergers of several European consultancies and companies.
3.2.4. The Empirical Bases for the Deliverables
The research has taken advantage of a variety of research methods (see Table 4). They can be
divided into four main categories: published and unpublished documents (earlier research,
statistical data, archival material, press material, etc.), questionnaires, interviews and internal
material including observation. The programme has particularly made an effort to gather a
wide range of published and unpublished documents and analyse them systematically.
3.2.4.1. Published and Unpublished Documents
It is appropriate to keep in mind that the theme co-ordinators were already quite experienced
within their respective area when the project started and that there has been an effort in the
project to develop this knowledge and integrate earlier research into the analysis. The previ-
ous research of the co-ordinators as well as reviews on relevant literature within each area has
therefore served as an important basis for the project. In each of the themes comprehensive
overviews have been carried out with the help of researchers associated with the project as
well as some subcontractors.
In order to identify the main currents of thought for the whole programme, the first
report (Lindvall, 1998) was an extensive literature review, predominantly based on books
written in English as well as international newspapers and magazines. Of particular impor-
tance were The Economist, the Financial Times, Business Week, and Information Strategy.
Less regularly followed were Fortune, Wired and CFO Europe. With this approach, the daily
ongoing discussion in Europe was well represented. In a similar way a basis for the sub-
themes on academic institutions and consultancies was created through literature reviews (cf.
Reports 2 and 4; i.e. Kipping and Armbrüster, 1998 and Amdam and Kvålshaugen, 1999).
23

Table 4. The Empirical Bases for the Deliverables
Theme Method Structure Content Diffusion
Academic Institutions Published and unpublished documents 4, 8 11,12 14, 17
Questionnaires - 14
Interviews 12 14
Observation 11, 12
Media Published and unpublished documents 5, 9 9, 11 15, 17
Questionnaires 10
Interviews
Observation
Consultancies Published and unpublished documents 2, 6 13 16
Questionnaires 13 16
Interviews 11, 13 16, 17
Observation 13 16, 17
Practice Published and unpublished documents 1, 7 17
Questionnaires 3 17
Interviews 17
Observation
The reports on the structure of the management fields were mainly built on statistical
data from other sources. In dealing with this data a number of limitations had to be kept in
mind. A first problem was that statistics and information are rather scarce and a second prob-
lem was that, due to the rather “open” nature of the fields, there are no widely accepted defini-
tions. For instance, when it comes to “management consulting” there are no obvious ways to
clearly delineate this market in terms of activities or service providers. As a consequence of
the first point, there are no reliable statistics covering management consulting neither in
Europe nor elsewhere in the world. Instead there is a relatively limited and rather dispersed
range of data sources that are sometimes complementary, but more often incompatible and
occasionally even contradictory.
In most cases the researchers carefully compiled, compared and analysed data from a
wide range of available sources: trade associations, industry experts, specific or general busi-
24

ness journals, etc. In a number of instances the existing information was complemented with
additional research, i.e. research in confidential documents, interviews or questionnaire sur-
veys.
The education theme focused in Report 8 (Byrkjeflot, 1999a) on the structure of man-
agement education in Europe compared to the American system of management education.
This analysis was based on different sources. One aim was to collect information from differ-
ent books on national systems of education as well as single educational institutions. Based on
this information and statistical data from OECD and other institutions, the European countries
were compared with the United States.
The media theme focused in Report 5 (Alvarez, Mazza and Mur, 1999) on the man-
agement publication field consisting of management books, management journals and man-
agement business press, while academic publications were left out. The data on management
books covered publications in 1996, while data on the diffusion and transformation of the
general and business press were collected in each country. The sources of data were mainly
national institutions and databases, which encompass figures of what is published in each
country. Case studies covering the North, the Middle and the South of Europe were then com-
pared in order to outline cross-national similarities and differences. In Report 9 (Svejenova
and Alvarez, 1999) on academic management publications a study by Francke et al (1990)
was used for the selection of 20 prominent management journals. The 1998 edition of EBSLG
(European Business Schools Librarians’ Group) was then utilised to trace the subscription
patterns among 27 European business schools.
The consultancy theme provided a systematic overview (Report 6, i.e. Kipping and
Armbrüster, 1999) with information on Europe as a whole as well as on twelve individual
European countries. Each chapter presented some background information of the long-term
development in each country and some assessment of future trends. However, due to (1) the
constantly changing boundaries of the consultancy field, (2) the difficulties to classify the
various services offered by the consultancies, and (3) the fact that only a part of all manage-
ment consultancies are members in national associations, statistics covering consultancy ac-
tivities have to be interpreted with caution.
Also in the research on content the research teams tried to draw on existing research.
However, in this phase they collected original data to a higher extent than in the first phase
(see fourth column of Table 4). Given the growing importance of Intranet and Internet in the
codification and dissemination of management knowledge, the consultancy theme also de-
cided to carry out research on this new medium. For reasons of confidentiality, it was not pos-
25

sible to gain access to internal web sites. However, it was studied how some of the major con-
sultancies use this new medium to present and disseminate their knowledge externally.
In the third phase on diffusion (see fifth column of Table 4) a considerable number of
in-depth case studies were conducted especially by the consultancy theme. They were to a
significant extent based on published and unpublished documents and covered a wide variety
of management models (namely the decentralised M-form, post-merger integration, human
resource management and TQM), a broad range of activities (from both the private and public
sector) and many European countries.
3.2.4.2. Questionnaires
3.2.4.2.1. Consulting
In order to analyse the role played by small consultancies with respect to the convergence of
management practices in Italy, the consultancy theme sent a detailed questionnaire to 600
member firms of APCO and ASSOCONSULT, the Italian professional consulting associa-
tions. Hence, a large number of small consultancies and single practitioners were approached
(Report 13, i.e. Kipping and Armbrüster, 2000). The response rate was slightly above 15 per
cent. The 91 consultancies responding to the questionnaire together employed more than
1,000 consultants. The findings have to be considered as preliminary due to the low response
rate and the fact that they are largely based on research conducted on the supply side. Further
work has to also consider the demand side, i.e. the client organisations themselves.
Within the consultancy theme a questionnaire was also mailed to 300 firms in Portugal
and 450 in Spain in order to study the introduction of management innovations/concepts and
the integration of external knowledge in this process (Report 16, i.e. Kipping, 2001). These
firms were selected randomly among the 500 largest firms in Portugal and the 3,000 largest in
Spain in 1997/98. The response rates were 22 per cent for the Portuguese and 11 per cent for
the Spanish sample, a circumstance that implies uncertainty regarding the results. However,
looked upon as a population study, this survey is one of the largest of consultancy use in
Spain and Portugal ever undertaken.
3.2.4.2.2. Media
Another extensive survey was undertaken by the media theme in order to study reading pref-
erences and habits of managers regarding managerial books, daily press, weeklies and jour-
nals. A questionnaire was sent to current students of the MBA programme at IESE in Barce-
lona as well as to the alumni that graduated between 1994 and 1999 of the Executive Educa-
26

tion programmes, the MBA programme and the International Executive Education pro-
grammes. A total of 4,925 questionnaires were sent out between December 1999 and January
2000. Unfortunately, the response rate was quite low as only 261 (i.e. 5.29 per cent) answered
the questions. Hence, it is difficult to draw conclusions regarding the original population.
However, the responding individuals can be defined as a self-selective population and it can
be expected that this population is more likely to have provided positive answers, i.e. that they
read management books and journals more than non-respondents. The latter, on the other
hand, could be expected to have refused to respond mainly for two reasons: (1) they do not
have the time neither to read nor to answer questionnaires; or (2) they found that most of the
questions go beyond their own reading habits, i.e. beyond the consumption of daily newspa-
pers. Since the results are based on a limited population affiliated with the Spanish MBA pro-
gramme, there is a need to be careful with conclusions. However, even with this small but
positively biased sample it seems possible to conclude that management publications are read
to a limited extent and with variation. Further it must be noticed that although the question-
naire was sent to people participating in an International Education programme, the majority
of the respondents – 80 per cent – was Spanish. A more broad view will in the near future be
obtained since the questionnaire study has recently been replicated in Norway. A survey will
also be undertaken in Sweden.
3.2.4.2.3. Education
When it comes to the role of educational background in diffusion of management knowledge
the theme on academic institutions presented data from a questionnaire sent to a sample of
Norwegian managers. They were asked to report on their educational background, their ca-
reers and their management competence (Report 14, i.e. Kvålshaugen, 2001a and Kvål-
shaugen, 2001b). Of the 1,200 managers surveyed, 551 responded (46 per cent response rate)
– 251 with a business education and 300 with a background in engineering. The results could
not establish any strong relationship between type of educational background and managerial
competence. Overall, educational background and type of work experience explained less
than 10 per cent of the variation in management competence. However, again there is a prob-
lem with respect to non-responses.
3.2.4.2.4. Practice
Data from a number of rather extensive questionnaires have, as indicated above, been ana-
lysed during the project. The first questionnaire was sent out already in October 1998 to a
sample of 242 managers in Swedish-based multinationals. The respondents had all partici-
27

pated in an MBA-programme at Uppsala University. The principal aim was to study whether
this group was aware of the main concepts identified in the first CEMP report. Of the more
than 150 concepts identified in Report 1, twenty-eight were chosen and questions about these
concepts were included in the questionnaire. The response rate was slightly above 50 per cent.
Since it can be expected that the non-respondents are less knowing than the respondents are,
this response rate may imply that the results somewhat overestimate the extent to which the
concepts are known. An indication of this is the fact that as many as 22 of the 28 concepts
selected were known by more than 50 per cent of the respondents. It can also be added that
the respondents were probably more familiar with the concepts than the majority of Swedish
managers, since they had all participated in an executive MBA programme. Their participa-
tion in this business education might also have awakened and stimulated their interest in new
management concepts and practices, since they considered themselves to be more open to-
wards new concepts than their firms were. However, they might also have overestimated their
own knowledge, assuming that these are concepts that they as former MBA participants
should know. Nevertheless, their common theoretical background can also be seen as an ad-
vantage since they all have the same theoretical base.
3.2.4.3. Interviews
A number of interviews have been carried out especially in the latter part of the project. The
theme on academic institutions has thus conducted interviews at HEC in France in order to get
further information for a comparison of content in French and Norwegian business schools
(Report 12, i.e. Amdam, Larsen and Kvålshaugen, 2000). In Uppsala a doctoral student partly
financed by CEMP has studied the pan-European accreditation system EQUIS, which was
developed and launched in 1997. The main source has been 26 in-depth personal interviews
with various key persons drawn from the project management of EQUIS, the efmd board and
international counterparts (see further Hedmo, 2002).
The consultancy theme has to a considerable extent relied on face-to-face interviews
with consultants from both large international and small to medium-sized consulting firms
and clients from a wide variety of organisations. In Italy, 24 interviews have been conducted
with representatives from consultancies including large and foreign ones (Crucini and Kip-
ping, 2001). In Sweden interviews were made with high-level representatives of the largest
consultancies (Eriksson, 2002). In order to attain the view of top managers in MNCs concern-
ing their view on consultants, interviews have also been conducted with the CEOs of the ten
companies with the largest sales value on the Stockholm Stock Exchange in 1997 (Engwall
28

and Eriksson, 2000). In addition about twenty managers in Spanish and Portuguese automo-
bile suppliers were interviewed on their interaction with consultants in the implementation of
quality management programmes (Report 16, i.e. Kipping, 2001).
3.2.4.4. Observation
In order to acquire a better understanding of the working conditions of consultants two CEMP
researchers spent several months as interns in the Austrian and Italian offices of large interna-
tional consultancies (Report 13, i.e. Kipping and Armbrüster, 2000). One of these researchers
also had two years of work experience in a medium-sized German consultancy. The research-
ers subsequently summarised and analysed their experiences in what Alvesson (1999, p. 7)
mentions as self-ethnography. This method was also partially used when the role of consult-
ants in the implementation of a standardised system (SAP R/3) was studied. One of the au-
thors of the case had previous experience from working in one of the large consulting firms
often used by the provider of the system and consequently has considerable knowledge about
it (see Report 17, i.e. Engwall and Pahlberg, 2001b). For the theme on academic institutions
some of the researchers benefited from their experiences as business school faculty (see Re-
ports 12 and 14; i.e. Amdam, Larsen and Kvålshaugen, 2000 and Kvålshaugen, 2001).
3.2.5. Conclusions
It should be evident from the above presentation that the research has relied on different
methodologies, including the exploration of internal (confidential) records or published
documents as well as face-to-face interviews and observation. Each of these methodologies
has their advantages and disadvantages. Thus, the more historically oriented, archive-based
studies can rarely include the present situation (for reasons of confidentiality). But at the same
time, they can have a fairly clear view of the actual outcome. By contrast, interview- and par-
ticipation-based studies usually examine a process that is still ongoing. This means that those
interviewed or observed usually have some stake in the outcome and are likely to present a
somewhat biased view. In addition, such studies include difficulties to reach definite conclu-
sions regarding a possible convergence of management practices. At the same time, these
more contemporary case studies make it possible to capture the interaction process at a level
of detail and insight, which it is not possible to achieve with studies solely based on written
material. This is particularly true with the observation studies, which on the other hand have
the drawback that the researcher may become too involved and even biased. However, the
combination of a wide variety of research methodologies has provided a rich database for
29

conclusions. In addition, although the studies have not been strictly representative, this ap-
proach has made it possible to reach some more general conclusions regarding the role played
by the actors in the European management knowledge industry.
3.3. RESULTS
Summarising the results of the CEMP programme we will first provide a discussion of the co-
evolution of management practice with academic institutions, media and consulting (Section
3.3.1). This will constitute a historical frame of reference for the other three subsections
(3.3.2, 3.3.3 and 3.3.4), that presents the conclusions from the research on structure, content
and diffusion.
3.3.1. Co-evolution of Management Practice with Academia, Media and Consulting
3.3.1.1. Introduction
The CEMP programme was at the outset based on a model including four fields of manage-
ment knowledge in interaction (Figure 2). It was pointed out that management practice is the
result of the links between such practice on the one hand and academic institutions, the media
and consultants, on the other. In the same way the field of business education is formed by the
interaction with practice, media companies and consultancies, etc. This interaction is occur-
ring through both the flow of individuals and the flow of information. Business graduates go
into practice, consultancies and media companies. Business school faculty interacts with prac-
tice through research and consulting, with the media through authorship and textbook selec-
tions. Similar interactive processes can be identified for media and consulting.
Figure 2. The Basic CEMP Model
Academic
Institutions
Media
Companies
Consultancies
30
Practice

Footnote: The names of the fields have been changed according the reasoning above in Section 3.2.1.
Early on in our research we found it appropriate to point to the time dimension in the
processes under study. This led in Report 7 (Engwall, 1999) to a somewhat revised model. It
implied that we did not only consider the interaction between the four fields of management
but also between systems over time. Using a discrete time dimension we focused on past, pre-
sent and future management. The CEMP programme therefore presents a first attempt to ex-
plore the complex interaction between management practice and the other fields of manage-
ment knowledge over time. While most of our research focused on the last decade of the
twentieth century, this section of the report provides a background in the form of a brief over-
view of the relationship between the evolution of management practice and the emergence
and development of the management knowledge industry from the late nineteenth century
until today. On the one hand, this will make it possible to find out to what extent the fields
were influenced by or influenced management practice. On the other hand, it provides the
background for the more detailed examination of this relationship during the 1990s, presented
in the subsequent sections.
3.3.1.2. The Evolution of Management Practice and Ideology
There have been several attempts to provide a structured overview of the succession of differ-
ent management fashions, ideas, ideologies, models etc. during the twentieth century. Usually,
they are based on an examination of the management literature rather than on actual manage-
ment practice (e.g. Barley and Kunda, 1992; Huczynski, 1993; Guillén, 1994; Report 1, i.e.
Lindvall, 1999). In order to explore the link between management practice and the different
fields of management knowledge systematically, we found it more useful to rely on the rich
historical research, which has examined the emergence and the evolution of business enter-
prise since the last quarter of the nineteenth century.
The large-scale managerial enterprise originated with the Second Industrial Revolution
in the 1880s in the United States. Due to the necessities of ensuring a high level of throughput
(or in more economic terms “capacity utilisation”) in the new capital-intensive industries, the
“Visible Hand” of management took over some part of economic co-ordination function from
the invisible hand of the market (Chandler, 1977). Companies following economies of scale
or scope in production quickly spread within the United States and other parts of the industri-
alised world during the first half of the twentieth century (cf. Chandler, 1990; Chandler et al.,
1997; Schmitz, 1997). A different kind of organisation, the decentralised “corporation”
31

emerged first in the United States during the 1920s and the 1930s. Following rapid growth,
increasing diversification and higher market pressures, a few American companies, such as
General Motors and DuPont, developed organisation structures with relatively independent
divisions, controlled and co-ordinated by a corporate head office (Chandler, 1962 and Sloan,
1965). The multidivisional or M-form, as it later became known, spread initially slowly and
saw its major expansion both in the United States and Europe only after Second World War
(cf. Kogut and Parkinson, 1993). From the mid-1970s onwards, these large diversified corpo-
rations came increasingly under pressure. This was partially the result of changes in the envi-
ronment (i.e. the repeated oil price shocks) and also due to the arrival of new competitors with
leaner and more focused structures, from Japan and other Asian countries. Subsequently, the
increasingly global financial markets have continued to pressure companies to concentrate on
their core competencies and adopt leaner management structures. As a result, the co-
ordination of activities both within companies and with suppliers and customers has become a
crucial competitive advantage. At the same time, the development of information technology
has enabled managers to obtain the necessary data to maintain control over such a networked
organisation (cf. Chisholm, 1998; Lipnack and Stamps, 1994; and Nohria and Ghoshal, 1997).
Moreover, standardised quality models, such as ISO, played an important part in the creation
of networked organisations, because they made it possible for core companies to outsource
many of their manufacturing activities. In relation to this development some observers have
even spoken of the advent of a networked society (Castells, 2000).
The tendencies described can be summarised as in Table 5 as three different waves of
management practice thereby highlighting the rising and falling character of each manage-
ment practice with a focus first on the production unit, later on the corporation, and more re-
cently on the network.
Table 5. Different Waves of Management Practice
Time period 1880s-1970s 1920s- 1970s-
Major Expansion 1920s-1950s 1960s-1980s 1990s-
Focus Production Unit Corporation Network
Dominant Ideology Scientific Management Strategy and Structure Business Processes
Key Figures F. W. Taylor P. F. Drucker Hammer and Champy
Role of Top Managers Specialist Generalist Communicator
32

The approach presented in Table 5 implies that the start date for each of the periods
corresponds to the time when a new business model – such as the large-scale production units
in the 1880s or the decentralised, multi-divisional corporation, or M-form, in the 1920s – first
appeared. After some time, these models generally saw a period of fast expansion, followed
by a gradual decline, until there were very few large firms with this kind of focus left. Usu-
ally, these models originated in the United States, even if in the last wave some inspiration
seems to have come from Japan. They subsequently spread to other industrialised countries,
but the speed and extent to which new models diffuse also differs considerably from one
country to the next. The M-form, for example, expanded from the 1960s onwards also in
Europe, but with significant differences between the major countries (cf. Channon, 1973;
Dyas and Thanheiser, 1976). Despite these different trajectories, however, the vast majority of
the largest 100 industrial companies in France and Germany and the United Kingdom had
adopted a divisionalised structure by the early 1990s (Whittington and Mayer, 2000 and
2001). Referring to these developments as waves also stresses the fact that these practices
overlap to a considerable extent. This means that one practice does not disappear when the
other starts, but that they exist in parallel for extensive time periods. Including both the tem-
poral and the spatial dimension therefore increases the variety of management models in exis-
tence at any one time.
While our focus has been on the evolution of practice, it is recognised that each of the
three waves has a kind of dominant ideology, which reflects the focus of management atten-
tion. In the first wave, “scientific management”, a term coined by the engineer Frederick W.
Taylor, became the predominant ideology, with the focusing on the systematic improvement
of productive efficiency. His ideas prompted a large number of similar and/or competing ap-
proaches, all of which spread quickly around the world during the first half of the twentieth
century (Merkle, 1980). One of the first to highlight the emergence of the corporate form of
organisation was Peter F. Drucker (see Drucker, 1946). He subsequently examined and de-
fined the role of managers not only in the corporation, but also in the economy and society as
a whole (e.g. Drucker, 1999; see also Beatty, 1998; Flaherty, 1999). Among the first to detect
and promote the changes in management practices in the late 1980s and early 1990s were Mi-
chael Hammer and James Champy (1993). They highlighted the need to structure business
activities horizontally as a process, rather than vertically as hierarchical structures.
Since our overview of the evolution of management practice has focused on the major
shifts in business organisation, the number of different models and related ideologies is
smaller than those in most of the above-mentioned attempts to structure the succession of
33

management ideas or fashions. It is important to stress that our approach does not preclude the
existence of additional management fashions or fads within each wave. Scientific manage-
ment, for example, focused initially only on the productivity of individual workers. But it
soon also looked at the organisation of the whole production process. Subsequently, however,
consultants developed different varieties of scientific management – sometimes changing lit-
tle more than the name (see below Section 3.3.1.3).
The dominant management practice and its underlying ideology in each wave deter-
mines the role of top managers. In the first wave, managers had to be specialists or experts in
science or engineering disciplines to control the different stages of the production processes.
They had to master everything from research and development (especially important in indus-
tries such as chemicals) through manufacturing (the efficient organisation of the shop floor) to
the sales and after-sales services. Other specialists in accounting or law supported them in the
related administrative activities. By contrast, in order to run the decentralised, diversified cor-
porations of the second wave, top managers had to be “generalists”. They needed sufficient
knowledge of different functions and an ability to understand a wide range of products and
activities carried out in the different divisions, in order to decide the market orientation and
competitive positioning of their company, widely referred to as “strategy” and its related or-
ganisational structure. In the third wave, the major role of managers changed again. They now
focus less on corporate organisation and strategy and more on the management of the value
chain as well as internal and external relationships, first and foremost with financial analysts.
This requires a great deal of communication skills, but probably also some basic understand-
ing of information technologies, which have come to be the underpinning of management
practice and ideology in the third wave.
Our brief overview of the evolution of management practice suggests that there have
been three major “waves” of development. In each of these waves, the dominant business
model to a certain extent reflects the adaptation of management practice to the opportunities
and constraints of the environment, for example in terms of technology and markets. Thus, as
mentioned above, without the necessary IT infrastructure it would be difficult to ensure co-
ordination and control within networked organisations. At the same time, there is some diffu-
sion of knowledge and ideas in the sense that a new practice builds on the achievements of the
previous one. This means for example that top managers in the second wave, can concentrate
their activities on strategy and structure of the company as a whole, because the management
of the shop-floor has become a more commonplace operation, which can be dealt with by a
lower level of management.
34

3.3.1.3. The Fields of Management Knowledge in the Three Waves
In general, the CEMP model suggests that the fields of academia, media and consulting co-
evolve with management practice, because they ultimately draw their knowledge from this
practice and thus depend on the changes there. At the same time, they contribute to these
changes, by disseminating new ideas and thus accelerating developments. However, one of
the important findings of CEMP research is that the relationship with management practice is
not exactly the same for each of the fields. While there are some similarities, there are also
significant differences, namely in the speed with which these fields react to the changes in
management practice. These differences are highlighted in the following.
3.3.1.3.1 Consulting
Consulting appears to be most closely related to management practice and reflect the ongoing
changes very quickly (Table 6; see Kipping, 2001b and Kipping 2002 for details). Consulting
activities appeared around the same time as large-scale managerial enterprises: during the last
quarter of the nineteenth century (see further Kipping, 2002). Several different actors (includ-
ing bankers, advertising agents, auditors and engineers) provided advice to managers on an ad
hoc and temporary basis. But consulting to management became a clearly recognisable busi-
ness activity, carried out for financial gain, only with the development of scientific manage-
ment. Frederick W. Taylor had developed his new approach towards shop floor management
based on systematic study of time and motion while working in a steel company. He subse-
quently disseminated his ideas not only through presentations and publications, but also in-
stalled the “Taylor system” for a fee in a number of companies – a fact which prompts some
authors to call him the “grandfather” of consulting. Many of those who developed similar but
competing approaches became much more involved in consulting activities. These early man-
agement consultants were known as industrial engineers or “efficiency experts”. Probably the
most successful among them, was the French immigrant Charles E. Bedaux who started sell-
ing his own system of scientific management in the United States in 1916. In the 1920s, he
counted a large number of well-known American firms such as Eastman Kodak, B. F. Good-
rich, Du Pont and General Electric among his American clients. His consultancy also ex-
panded to Europe and other parts of the world from 1926 onwards, when it opened its first
foreign office in London. Expansion was particularly rapid during the 1930s and the 1940s, in
part prompted by the need for rapid efficiency improvements during the Second World War
(Kipping, 1999). In many European countries, especially in France and the UK, Bedaux be-
came the progenitor of the emerging consulting industry, when some engineers left the con-
35

sultancy to establish their own firms. The period after Second World War saw the emergence
of more sophisticated approaches to measure and reward worker performance. The so-called
Methods-Time-Measurement or MTM system became particularly prominent and enabled the
consultancy founded by one of its inventors, Harold B. Maynard, to expand rapidly both at
home and abroad (Kipping, 1999).
Table 6. The Evolution of the Consulting Industry
Time Period Major Expansion Key issues Prominent Consultancies
1900s-1980s 1930s-1950s Efficiency of workers and production Emerson, Bedaux, Maynard
1930s- 1960s-1980s Decentralisation and portfolio planning Booz Allen, McKinsey, A.T.
Kearney, BCG
1970s- 1990s- Internal and external co-ordination “Big Five”, EDS, CSC, Cap
Gemini
Source: Kipping (2002).
However, from the 1960s onwards (the second wave) the mentioned service providers
were increasingly challenged and then displaced by a new wave of management consultancies
that focused on issues related to corporate organisation and strategy (decentralisation and
portfolio planning). Most of these consulting firms had emerged in the United States during
the first decades of the twentieth century from a variety of origins, including contract research
(Arthur D. Little), psychology (Edwin Booz) and accounting (James O. McKinsey). They
came to prominence mainly in the period after Second World War, facilitating and promoting
the dissemination of the new corporate organisation, by introducing decentralised structures,
strategic planning, budgeting and control methods, operations research etc. (cf. Kogut and
Parkinson, 1993). McKinsey & Company in a way came to epitomise what some scholars
term “modern” management consulting (McKenna, 1995). The consultancy was particularly
successful in its international expansion. Opening its first foreign office in London in 1959, it
had six offices in Western Europe only ten years later, which accounted for more than one
third of its overall revenues at the time (Kipping, 1999). In the 1970s and the 1980s, McKin-
sey continued to expand and became the world’s leading consulting firm in terms of the num-
ber of employees, revenues and most, importantly prestige (Bartlett, 1998). Like in the previ-
ous wave, the success of consultancies like McKinsey sparked a number of spin-offs in the
1960s and the 1970s. Thus, in 1963 Bruce Hendersen left Arthur D Little to set up the Boston
36

Boston Consulting Group (BCG), which focused on corporate strategy, using a number of
innovative approaches (including the well-known portfolio matrix). Former BCG consultants
in turn were at the origin of several other important firms, including the leading German con-
sultancy Roland Berger in 1967 and William Bain in 1973 (Kipping, 1999).
From the 1990s onwards (the third wave), new challengers emerged to the organisa-
tion and strategy consultancies in the form of the large accountancies and some IT firms.
Once again these changes in the consulting industry appear related to a change in manage-
ment practice. The first to exploit these opportunities for new types of consulting were the
large Anglo-American accounting firms. Auditors and accountants were among those offering
consultancy type services in the nineteenth century, in addition to their regular tasks, assisting
client companies for example with the implementation of new accounting systems, or in cases
of restructuring and bankruptcy. Most of the accountancy firms established separate organisa-
tional units to provide this kind of management advisory services after the Second World War
(e.g. Jones, 1995). Revenues from these activities only began to reach significant proportions
during the 1980s and grew very fast during the 1990s. This development was reinforced by
the stagnation of revenues in their accounting and audit business from the 1970s onwards.
They also responded by a series of mergers, which gradually reduced their number to eight at
the end of the 1980s and five at the end of the 1990s: Arthur Andersen, Deloitte & Touche,
Ernest & Young, KPMG and PriceWaterhouse Coopers.
The most successful example of an accountancy moving into consulting is probably
Arthur Andersen. It created a separate division called Andersen Consulting only in 1989. Its
revenues grew from just over $ 1 billion at the time to $ 8.3 billion in 1998 ($ 1.2 billion of
which were accounted for by outsourcing). This meant that it had become the world’s largest
consultancy and also clearly surpassed the accountancy part (Arthur Andersen), which only
had a turnover of $ 6.1 billion in 1998. After a long-drawn and nasty legal and publicity bat-
tle, the two halves of the company became separate legal entities. Andersen Consulting had to
change its name (opting for Accenture), while the latter (now known as Andersen) continued
to develop its own consulting activities.
Others to enter the lucrative market for IT-related consulting were firms such as Elec-
tronic Data Systems (EDS), Computer Sciences Corporation (CSC), and Cap Gemini. Initially
mainly offering data processing or related activities, these firms subsequently broadened their
consulting activities, partially through acquisitions. Some of the hardware or software manu-
facturers, such as IBM and Hewlett Packard and more recently Microsoft and SAP, have also
been increasing their consulting activities over recent years. Much of the consulting revenues
37

of these IT related consultancy firms resulted from assisting in the implementation of new
company-wide software. Especially prominent in this respect has been the installation of so-
called enterprise resource planning or ERP systems, such as SAP/R3, which help to integrate
data flow and access to information over the whole range of a company’s activities. Consult-
ing services centred on the need to adjust the organisation to the requirements of the ERP sys-
tem and to train its users (Lindvall and Pahlberg, 1999, see also Report 17, i.e. Engwall and
Pahlberg, 2001b). As a whole, and for most of them also individually, these service providers
have been growing faster than the market and also outgrown the traditional strategy firms,
who have been rather slow to react to these challenges (Kipping and Armbrüster, 2002).
Three major conclusions can be drawn from this brief overview. First of all, the devel-
opment of the consulting business appears fairly closely related to changes in management
practice. Consultants quickly learned from practice and subsequently disseminated (and de-
veloped) the insights gained, thus contributing to the spread of new management models.
Secondly, in each of the waves there were a number of dominant players, and they were usu-
ally of American origin. At the same time, these large consultancies usually prompted spin-
offs and the development of a more nationally or locally based consulting industry. Thirdly,
the dominant consultancies in one wave appear to have found it difficult to maintain their
leading position during the subsequent wave. They continued their activities for a while, but
gradually declined and then disappeared (for the reasons see Kipping, 2002; Kipping and
Amorim, 2002).
3.3.1.3.2. Media
Overall, the media has also evolved in fairly close relation with the evolution of industrial and
post-industrial societies and economies. However, the different elements of the media studied
by the CEMP programme – academic journals, popular press, best sellers books – have had
different trajectories in terms of their own development and relationship with management
practices.
Popular business books, although they have always existed, acquired a special rele-
vance in the corporate wave. Peter F. Drucker, the first to discover the related changes in
management practice, had the status of the management author since the 1950s. However, it
was In Search of Excellence, authored in 1982 by two McKinsey Consultants, Tom Peters and
Robert Waterman, that inaugurated the era of popular business books. On the surface, this
book deals with issues belonging to the strategy and structure wave, and was produced by one
of its most representative consultancies. At the same time, however, it already addressed some
38

of the concerns becoming more predominant in the “network” wave, where the manager had
to go beyond analytical tools and dominate soft practices as those related to skills, culture,
people management, etc. Our surveys of the reading habits of Spanish and Norwegian manag-
ers (Report 10, i.e. Alvarez and Mazza, and Amdam, 2002) suggest that books dealing with
these kinds of managerial skills (self-control, vision, managing people) are the most influen-
tial and representative of the network wave. Besides Michael Porter’s Competitive Strategy
(1980), a remnant of the “corporate” wave, the most influential books are Daniel Goleman’s
Emotional Intelligence (1995), Stephen Covey’s The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People
(1990) and Peter Senge’s Fifth Discipline (1990) – all three close to the concerns of managers
in the networking era.
The business press has also become truly “popular” as a source of information and
labels for managers only during the last 15 to 20 years. This is shown by a brief overview of
the history of the Financial Times, Europe’s most influential business daily (see Report 10,
i.e. Alvarez and Mazza, 2000). Founded in 1888 as a four-page newspaper, the initial reader-
ship of the Financial Times’ was limited to the financial community in the City of London.
After merging in 1945 with its rival the Financial News (established in 1893), the paper
gradually grew, not only in size and readership, but also in its breadth of coverage which be-
gan to extend to industry, commerce, politics, technology and the arts. However, the key to
the success of the paper, especially over the past decade, appears to have been the growth of
international equity and bond trading, the liberalisation of capital markets and the expansion
of the global economy. The paper has been transformed from a British daily business newspa-
per to a truly international newspaper. Acknowledged as one of the world’s most respected
business titles, the Financial Times had in the period of September 1997 to February 1998 a
daily circulation of almost 350,000 copies. Global readership is estimated at over 1.3 million
in more than 160 countries. According to the European Business Readership Survey (1993),
the Financial Times has almost twice the readership of The Economist and nearly five times
that of the Wall Street Journal. The 1995 survey of the readership habits of chief executives in
Europe also shows that the Financial Times is significantly more popular than any other Eng-
lish language business title.
By contrast, academic publications appear much further from the development of
management practice. As Svejanova and Alvarez (1999, i.e. Report 9) show, the influence of
academic journals is remote and indirect at best. Instead it seems that they rather are follow-
ing practice. This is illustrated by Table 7, which summarises the launching dates of some of
the major academic journals.
39

Table 7. Management Journals in Different Areas
Area Europe USA
General Management Journal of Management Studies (1964) Academy of Management Journal 1958)
Accounting Accounting, Organizations and Society
(1976)
Managerial Economics European Journal of Operations Research
(1977)
Purchasing European Journal of Purchasing and Sup-
ply Management (1994
Accounting Review (1926)
Management Science (1954)
International Journal of Purchasing and
Materials Management (1965)
Organisation Organization Studies (1980) Administrative Science Quarterly (1956)
Marketing European Journal of Marketing (1967) Journal of Marketing (1936)
Source: Engwall (1998, p. 95).
First, Table 7 shows with respect to the different waves of management practice that the spe-
cialist journals (in areas such as accounting, marketing, etc.) usually originated earlier than
those dealing with more general management problems, which are related to the second wave.
However, it should be noted that following the success of the new journals in each wave, ad-
ditional, often somewhat more specialist journals were established – a process somewhat
similar to the spin-offs from successful consultancies. Secondly, most of these journals
emerged only during the heydays of each wave twenty or more years after the changes in
practice originally emerged. Thus, there is a significant delay with which academia “discov-
ers” the changes occurring in management practice. Finally, it should also be noted that in
each of the areas, there are usually pairs of US-based and European journals. Like in the con-
sulting field, however, the American journals have a clear lead in the timing of their estab-
lishment and in terms of their visibility and academic prestige (cf. Engwall, 1998).
3.3.1.3.3. Education
Regarding the education of managers, there are clear indications that engineers played a
dominant role during the emergence of managerial enterprise in the later part of the nineteenth
century (Chandler, 1990; Shenhav, 1999). Unlike in the United States, in many European
40

countries engineers seem to have been able to retain their dominant position in top manage-
ment for much of the twentieth century. It was only from the 1960s onwards, that business
graduates made significant inroads into the higher levels of companies, eventually becoming
dominant during the 1980s and the 1990s. This tendency is illustrated for France, Germany
and Norway in Table 8. Between 1968 and the 1990s the share of business graduates of the
cohort of top managers having engineering, business and law degrees thus rose from 34 % to
58 % in France, from 26 % to 52 % in Germany, and from 7 % to 41 % in Norway.
The low ratios in the late 1960s also points to the fact that developments in the educa-
tional field take much longer to reflect the changes in management practice than those in con-
sulting or in media. It is interesting to note in this respect that, until the 1980s, business school
graduates in Norway were able to compete with engineers as top managers not because they
were generalists, but because they were functional experts (Amdam, 1999). This also explains
the fact that in many parts of Europe until today, management is not an established subject of
study. In Germany, for example, it is Betriebswirtschaftslehre (business economics); in Italy,
it used to be economia aziendale (Engwall and Zagmani, 1998).
Table 8. Education of Top Managers in France, Germany and Norway (1968 and the 1990s)
1968 1990s
Country Engineering Business Law Engineering Business Law
France
Germany
Norway
59% 34% 7% 42% 58% 0%
54% 26% 17% 23% 52% 15%
52% 7% 12% 30% 41% 9%
Source: Report 14, i.e. Kvålshaugen (2001). The figures for law in 1968 also include social science degrees.
The significant “inertia” or resilience of existing educational institutions in Europe
(compared to the United States) might have two reasons: the much longer academic traditions
in Europe, which meant that new management institutions originating outside the existing
establishment took a long time to become accepted as legitimate knowledge providers. In the
41

German case, for example, the Handelshochschulen emerged from the 1890s onwards, at
about the same time as the business schools in the United States (Wharton being founded in
1881) and the écoles de commerce in France (HEC also dating back to 1881). The first Han-
delshochschulen were actually modelled after the much older technical universities and they
provided their graduates with practical knowledge that encouraged them to administer the
corporation in line with principles related to the scientific management ideology (Locke,
1984). Most importantly however, the Handelshochschulen were gradually integrated into the
economics faculties of the existing universities (Meyer, 1998).
A second reason for the inertia of the institutional arrangements in management
education might be the influence of the state in Europe on the educational system as a whole.
This means that very often political considerations prevailed, whereas business usually had a
limited direct influence on the content of management education (Byrkeflot, 1999b). Thus, for
example, following the emergence of the corporate strategy and organisation ideology, US
business schools were the first to adjust their curricula – albeit with a considerable delay
compared to the changes in management practice. From the 1960s onwards, strategy began to
develop into a core discipline in a substantial number of US business schools (Fredrickson,
1990). In Europe by contrast, strategy penetrated the curricula only at a later stage. In terms of
more institutional changes, it is interesting to notice that the breakthrough of the American-
inspired MBA programmes – which stress the generalist aspect of the manger to a stronger
degree than the traditional European business schools – took place in Europe only in the
1980s (Boutaiba and Strandgaard Pedersen, 2002). This was a time when the M-form already
had achieved a strong position within big business.
The emergence of network organisations and the network society in the 1990s has also
had an impact on management education. Since companies have become more competence
driven, they have challenged educational institutions to be more relevant and to create net-
works for the exchange of knowledge between academia and practice. In the United States,
this process has led to a remarkable growth of corporate universities (Meister, 1998). As
many of these American corporate universities have been established and are run without any
formal link to existing business schools, they challenge to a certain extent the position that
business schools had previously won in competition with engineering education. In Europe,
the recent changes in management practice seem to have a more immediate effect on man-
agement education than in previous waves – possibly due to an increasing withdrawal of the
state. European business schools try to meet these challenges by establishing long-lasting
partnership agreement with corporations and consequently developing the corporate univer-
42

sity idea within the framework of the business school (Lorange, 1996). On a European level
institutions like efmd give high priority to the idea of creating networks between companies
and academic institutions.
3.3.1.4. Implications for Convergence
Thus, when taking a long-term perspective, it becomes clear that the evolution of the man-
agement knowledge fields is closely linked to the development of management practice and
ideology. When there was a major shift in the role of managers and in the focus of their atten-
tion, the kind of consultancy they used and their educational background as well as the con-
tent of business publications also changed. At the same time, this overview also shows that
the different carriers did not have identical relationships with management practice. Consult-
ing firms seem most closely related to management practice, because they derive their ideas
from client organisations and have an economic interest in diffusing them rapidly among
companies, which are not yet their clients. Publications, especially popular business books,
reviews and journals also appear to reflect the dominant ideology very closely. Management
gurus are among the first to identify and highlight new developments in their books and pres-
entations. Academic publications by contrast appear to have only a fairly remote relationship
with management practice. Academic authors thus only appear to discover developments once
they have reached a fairly dominant position (e.g. the time difference between the work of
Drucker and Chandler on the multidivisional corporate organisation). They are usually driven
by intrinsic (peer-driven) performance criteria, where the relevance for practice plays only a
minor role. The same is true for management education. However, given their importance for
the preparation of actual managers, they have always been subject to pressures from the busi-
ness community. The latter has on several occasions not hesitated to set up their own educa-
tional institutions, i.e. Handelshochschulen or the écoles de commerce at the end of the nine-
teenth century or corporate universities a century later. At the same time, both the power of
the academic establishment and the involvement of the state in the educational system acted
as countervailing forces.
In terms of the convergence of management practice, the historical overview would
suggest that there was indeed some convergence of managerial practice towards a predomi-
nant model during each of the three waves. However, it has to be stressed that there are differ-
ences between countries. As seen in our brief overview, many of the waves seem to have
started among large firms in the United States. Subsequently they expanded, first slowly then
at growing speed, both within the United States in to other parts of the industrialised world,
43

including Europe. The existing literature on national business systems suggests that their dis-
semination will have occurred at different speeds and to a different extent in the various
European countries (see further below Section 4.1.2). Thus, at any given time, several busi-
ness models co-existed in different countries and even within one country. The question is
whether and, if yes, how, these changes in the dominant model also affected the remote parts
of each national business system, i.e. local, small, usually family-owned and -managed enter-
prises.
The convergence process not only concerned management practice, but also the dif-
ferent carriers of management knowledge themselves. In each wave, a few dominant role
models emerged for each of them. Among consultancies, the dominant service providers usu-
ally spread from their country of origin and established a world-wide presence. Spin-offs and
the copying of the new role model by small consultancies furthered the dissemination of the
new wave of management practice and, at the same time, might have facilitated its adaptation
to the different national contexts. Changes in management practice usually resulted in the
gradual decline, and eventual demise, of the dominant service providers from the previous
wave. The different service providers nevertheless co-existed during significant time periods.
In management education, during each of the waves different models both in terms of content
and institutional form emerged and diffused quite widely. The overall dynamic is, however,
less pronounced than in the case of consultancies, because the existing academic establish-
ment and the educational policies of governments provided a degree of stability and a source
of continued national differences. In several instances, the existing higher education system
absorbed institutions that had emerged outside.
Regarding management publications, there were usually a few determinant books pub-
lished in the early stages of each wave, providing the dominant terminology and ideology. In
terms of the periodic publications, the popular journals and reviews then contributed to its
more widespread diffusion, whereas the more academic outlets seem to have reacted with a
significant delay. In terms of their own existence, publishing houses and business journals
appear to have been able to survive despite changes in the predominant practice and ideology,
by adapting their content to the new trends. During most of the twentieth century, much of
management publishing seems to have remained confined to national markets due to language
constraints (notwithstanding the translation of the main best sellers). More recently, however,
there seems to have been a trend of global expansion and consolidation in the industry.
44

3.3.2. Structure: Polarisation within the Fields
3.3.2.1. Introduction
One of the objectives of the CEMP programme was to acquire an understanding of the way in
which the management fields of management education, media and consulting affect the con-
vergence of managerial practices across Europe. The spatial domains of activity of the fields
or, how the structure of the fields is distributed and operates across the European geography
will undoubtedly affect the extension and depth of that impact.
Most of the literature available on the convergence of practices in Europe assumes a
nation-state or business system unit of analysis (see e.g. Whitley, 1992 and 1999, and Whitley
and Kristensen, 1996 and 1997). As the previous section indicates, the nation-state was truly
the dominant domain of action in the first basic two waves of the co-evolution between man-
agement practices and ideas. However, the data gathered within the CEMP programme indi-
cates that in recent years there has developed a polarisation within fields. On the one hand we
find global and European activities, leading mostly to convergence of ideas and practices. On
the other hand, there are local activities, which mostly lead to variety and retention. This in
turn implies that the nation-system is becoming less significant as the dominant reference for
the activity of the fields.
This section, which summarises the results of the first phase of the CEMP programme,
will provide evidence for these two observations. We will first enumerate and briefly explain
the most relevant domains of action for the fields. Second, we will document how each field
of knowledge may operate simultaneously in most or all of them, especially the global and the
local. Third, we will provide evidence regarding the decreasing importance of the national-
systems domain, as a result of the above-mentioned polarisation.
3.3.2.2. Fields of Knowledge and Domains of Action
The data examined and produced by the CEMP programme indicate that there are several
domains of action where the actors of management fields operate. A first domain refers to a
local territory where networks of firms gain competitive advantage by competing or collabo-
rating, or even doing both at the same time, in a limited space that is more reduced than a na-
tional business system. Michael Porter's “cluster” concept captures the competitive edge of
this domain, which is usually based on historical regions. Examples of these are some North-
ern Italian regions specialised in fashion (e.g. Emilia Romagna), German regions highly
45

skilled in small machinery production (e.g. Baden-Württemberg), and the new emergent clus-
ters of high tech companies in Ireland, next to air transport facilities.
A second domain of practices is the national-business system. They vary across a set
of institutional variables, from public (e.g. state regulations, labour and financial markets) to
more private and cultural (family traditions, levels of trust, and others), as detailed by Richard
Whitley (e.g. Whitley, 1999). His argumentative thrust is that most of these variables are
strongly institutionally embedded and more powerful than managerial practices. This is espe-
cially true for local financial systems and the labour market, which will not be easily changed
or influenced by external models and techniques. Whitley thus argues for the existence of a
diversity of managerial practices.
There is also the unique role of the business system of the United Kingdom. This
uniqueness has three causes. First, the fact that the English language has become the “lingua
franca” of most international business operations, gives to management education in the
United Kingdom as well as publishers of all kinds of texts (from academic books to the daily
press) a strong competitive advantage. Second, the “special relationship” between the United
Kingdom and the United States due to historical and linguistic reasons, makes the United
Kingdom sometimes to operate as a sort of stepping stone for US business ideas, a carrier of
knowledge through consultancies, etc. Finally, the importance of the City and its influence on
financial markets all over Europe add power to the influence of the UK, especially taking into
account European recent trends towards an Anglo-Saxon model of corporate governance.
Europe as a whole, as reference for the question of convergence, is mostly used by scholars
interested in the issue of the influence of US business models in Europe (Djelic, 1998; Kip-
ping and Bjarnar, 1998). There is finally the broadest domain, world-wide systems, which is
rapidly becoming the focus of attention as a result of globalisation as conceived by Meyer
(2002) and Wallerstein (1999).
Furthermore, it is necessary to distinguish all the previous levels from the fact that all
management (as well as social action) is local, that is, situational, and therefore subject to
micro adaptation, translation, etc. (see further Alvarez, 2000). Report 15 (Mazza and Alvarez,
2001) on knowledge, media and local managerial politics contains an in-depth consideration
of this most micro perspective.
3.3.2.3. The Polarisation within Fields
On the basis of the above reasoning it can be concluded that actors in the different manage-
ment fields may operate simultaneously in different domains of action, and second that this is
46

leading to a polarisation of management activities between global and local ones. All the
fields studied by the CEMP programme show examples of such simultaneous operation in
different domains.
3.3.2.3.1. Consulting
Consulting constitute the most obvious case in point for the simultaneity of different domains
of action. First, CEMP research revealed the dominance of service providers of Anglo-
American origin that operate mostly at a global domain. At the same time, the research has
confirmed that small- and medium-sized consulting firms continue to play an important, pos-
sibly even growing role (Report 6, i.e. Kipping and Armbrüster, 1999; cf. also Keeble and
Schwalbach 1995). However, their presence clearly differs across Europe. At one extreme,
there are countries like France and the United Kingdom, dominated to a considerable extent
by a limited number of larger consultancies. At the other extreme, one finds Germany, where
the twenty largest consulting firms have a share of less than 20 per cent of the total consul-
tancy market. These smaller and more nationally bounded consultancies are often set up by
former executives of large companies or by consultants who were working in larger consult-
ing firms. They might therefore end up reproducing what characterises the knowledge and the
approach of large corporations and consultancies (Engwall, 1999).
CEMP research suggests that it is the large, centrally located companies that tend to be
the clients of the large international consultancies (Engwall and Eriksson, 2000). The world-
wide activities and the high fees claimed by these consultancies effectively exclude most
SMEs from their circle of clients. Centrally located SMEs, on the other hand, appear to be
served by spin-offs from the large international and national consultancies, since most of
these spin-offs are likely to locate in central areas (where there is a market). These small con-
sultancies are cheaper to operate and are able to reach a clientele that is not occupied by their
larger competitors. It also seems likely that large peripherally based companies, many of
which are owned by large corporations with centrally based headquarters, buy their services
from the large international or national consultancies.
In sum, in the consultancy arena there are different levels or domains of competition
and markets, each one configuring different domains of action. Moreover, because of spin-
offs, mergers and acquisitions, etc., people and practices that previously worked mostly at one
domain spill over to other domains, confirming our simultaneity of domains of action argu-
ment. Furthermore, what the available data suggests is that the large international consultan-
cies are occupying the European domain created by the common market, while at the other
47

pole of the fields smaller consultancies are so adapted to local conditions that they are often
more regional or local than national.
3.3.2.3.2. Media
The simultaneity of domains of action of the fields is also very well exemplified in the man-
agement media. The same specific medium may operate simultaneously in several European
countries, or even world-wide, in the same or different languages, and with the same or par-
tially adapted content. The following examples from the popular business press are good illus-
trations of that (data on circulation appears in Report 5, i.e. Alvarez, Mazza and Mur, 1999):
• The Financial Times issues a UK edition, and a world-wide edition with a leadership estimated
at over 1.3 million. In some cases there is a special edition adapted to some national
markets of importance, such as Germany.
• The Economist, published from the United Kingdom, appears in only one edition, selling
above 200,000 copies. Although the focus of its content is European, or international, it is
only printed in English.
• The Harvard Business Review, the single most important bi-monthly periodical aimed at
top decision-makers, is published from the United States in English, in a homogenous edition
for the world-wide market.
• The Wall Street Journal, a US based newspaper, distributes a special edition in Europe
partially with some specific content (specially regarding information on European financial
markets), and some of the same content world wide, selling somewhat above 50,000
copies.
• Most general national or local newspapers publish special business pages, sharing stories
with international newspapers, magazines or news agencies.
These circumstances are further complicated by the fact that some media deliver different
products simultaneously, as well: economic surveys, different types of business guides, books,
etc., as in the case of The Financial Times (see a detailed enumeration in CEMP Report 5, i.e.
Alvarez, Mazza and Mur, 1999).
In fact, the most influential media conglomerates are also multinational themselves,
and could serve as example of how multinationals operate in several space domains simulta-
neously, promoting convergence of managerial practices at different levels. They are also an
example of the polarisation of domains of action within fields and of the lesser importance of
national domains. For example, the Group Pearson is an international media company with
three main businesses:
48

1. Pearson Education: Textbooks, online learning tools and testing and assessment programs
for business education. They are aimed at world-wide markets but their strongest presence
in the United States.
2. Financial Times Group: Global business and investment news, comment and analysis.
Business and financial newspapers and online services inform. Their strongest presence is
in Europe, where the United Kingdom is the most important national market.
3. Penguin Group: English-language publisher. Fiction and non-fiction books, best sellers
and classics, children's and reference works. Their strongest presence is in Europe.
More complexity arises from the lack of equivalence among the financial policies and content
policies of the new emerging media conglomerates that operate across Europe. For instance,
Kluwer, a multinational publishing house with ownership in the Netherlands, does not hold
the same lines of business across its European subsidiaries. For instance in Spain, they do not
carry any academic publications, contrary to what they do in the Netherlands. Additionally,
the Spanish subsidiary does not receive any instructions from the headquarters as to what
lines of business to pursue. In fact, the only requirement from the main office is financial (Al-
varez, interview with the CEO of Wolters Kluwer Spain).
3.3.2.3.3. Education
The simultaneity of domains of action and the polarisation within fields also takes place in the
case of education. For instance, European business schools appeared mainly within a regional
domain of practice. In Germany, Handelshochschulen emerged from the 1890s to 1910 in
commercial centres like Aachen, Berlin, Cologne, Leipzig and Munich. In French, the
grandes écoles de commerce emerged at the same time in close co-operation with local cham-
bers of commerce, which even owned the schools (Locke, 1984; Meyer, 1998). When the
business schools in Spain emerged in the 1950s, they were closely interwoven with regional
business networks in Madrid and Barcelona (Puig, 2002).
In some countries dominated by regional business-education networks, some business
schools developed into national players. This has been the case in France, where some
grandes écoles de commerce, like HEC and ESSEC in Paris, have developed into important
national players (Larsen, 2002; Takagi and de Carlo, 2002). More striking, however, is the
expansion from the regional or local pole to the international pole, by-passing the national
domain of action. One aspect of this process has been the increasing number of foreign stu-
dents even at regional business schools. An interesting case is IMD in Lausanne. Originally
this school had a local character since IMI and IMEDE, the two institutions that in 1990
49

merged to IMD, were established to serve the interest of two international companies, Alcan
and Nestlé. Every year 5,500 executives from 70 countries attend one of the executive pro-
grams at IMD. Another regional school that has developed to an international player in addi-
tion to serving regional interests is IESE in Barcelona. In 1997/98 there were 430 students
from 52 countries attending the MBA program at IESE in Barcelona, and 38 students from 14
countries attending the Ph.D.-programme. Especially in the United Kingdom, that has seen
the fastest increase in number of MBA-programmes in Europe since 1980, the dominance of
foreign students is typical even for regionally based business schools. For instance, among
846 business students in 2000/2001 at Nottingham University Business School, 408 were
from non-EU countries.
A recent trend is the formation of strategic alliances between (1) business schools
across borders and (2) between business schools and international corporations with
headquarters in other countries than the country where the business school is located. This is
the global domain of action. IMD, for instance, offers partnership programmes to 30-40
companies, among which British Telecom and the Norwegian company, Norsk Hydro, are
among the largest consumers. In 1999/2000 INSEAD offered programmes to 54 companies,
among which most of them were non-French. These alliances are reflected in the board of
INSEAD, which included 27 member from ten countries. During the last years, we have also
seen an increasing number of joint programmes. In some cases, the internationalisation
process has gone even further, since European business schools have established campuses
abroad. In 1999, INSEAD thus set up a campus in Singapore, and in September 2000, the
University of Nottingham set up a campus in Malaysia.
A further illustration of the mentioned tendencies is the case of the Norwegian School
of Management (see Table 9). Already in the mid-1980s it merged with ten regional business
administration colleges and in the 1990s it acquired two other schools. In the early years of
the present century additional acquisitions were made (first column in Table 9). The interna-
tional alliances started in the late 1990s first with a Chinese university, then with British and
Canadian institutions, and most recently with the Australian School of Management (second
column in Table 9). In 2000 the school even set up a campus in Lithuania (third column in
Table 9).
Table 9. Expansion of the Norwegian School of Management BI, Oslo 1985-2002
Year National Mergers and Acquisitions International Alliances International Campuses
50

1985 10 regional business administration
colleges
1993 The Norwegian School of Marketing;
Oslo Business School
1997 The Norwegian Academy of Banking Fudan University – Shanghai,
Master of Management Programme
1998 Cranfield University UK, University
of Calgary Canada, Norwegian
University of Science
and Technology, Executive Programme
in Project Management
2000 The Norwegian Shipping Academy;
The Norwegian School of Trade and
Retail Management
2001 The Norwegian Academy of Insurance Australian School of Management,
Master of Management
Programme
3.3.2.3.4. Conclusion
BI’s International School of
Management – Lithuania
In sum, in the three fields studied we have found abundant evidence of a polarisation within
fields. This polarisation has as its more important poles the global and the more local do-
mains. This in turn means that national business systems are loosing importance in the third
phase of the co-evolution of practices and ideas.
3.3.2.4. The Decreasing Importance of the National Domain
The previous subsection has provided arguments for the plurality of domains where actors on
the fields of management knowledge operate and the polarisation within fields of action be-
tween the local and the global. This polarisation threatens the predominant role that the nation
state has played for almost a century and, consequently, that of the national domain (see fur-
ther Guillén, 2001). Of course, because of the varied power of the different nation states in
Europe, the decreasing importance of the national domains varies across countries and across
carriers. Nevertheless, the following evidence from CEMP research points to a clear trend.
51

3.3.2.4.1. Consulting
In consulting, as noted in the historical overview, the most striking and in a way defining
phenomenon of the 1990s has been the rapid expansion of consultancy service providers
linked to large accountancies and providers of IT services. All of these service providers have
been growing faster than the market and also outgrown the traditional strategy firms, estab-
lishing themselves firmly among the largest consulting firms in Europe as a whole and in
most of the countries included in the CEMP research.
In most countries studied, these relative newcomers have displaced the large, national
consultancies. Many of the latter had originated during the 1960s, sometimes as spin-offs
from the aforementioned US strategy firms, taking advantage of the growing market at the
time. At the beginning of the 1990s, our data shows, these national consultancies still domi-
nated their home market alongside the earlier, traditional American consulting firms. At the
end of the decade however, they have either been relegated to secondary importance – drop-
ping out of the top ten, even top twenty consultancies in their own country – or have disap-
peared completely, often being bought up by the newcomers (Report 6, i.e. Kipping and Arm-
brüster, 1999).
One could therefore conclude that consultancy markets in Europe have adopted a kind
of bi-polar structure, dominated on the one hand, by the large, international service providers
and, on the other hand by small, locally based consulting firms. This polarisation, that implies
a lesser importance of the national domain, can also be observed in the other fields.
3.3.2.4.2. Media
Regarding the field of the media, popular business books for practitioners constitute another
good example of the decreasing importance of national domains, and indeed an example of
the predominance of US scholars (Alvarez, 1997; Mazza and Alvarez, 2000). Bedeian and
Wren (2001) thus report that among the about 25 most influential business books only one is
European (from the United Kingdom). Moreover, in a survey on Spanish managerial reader-
ship habits (CEMP Report 10, i.e. Alvarez and Mazza, 2000) all the books that managers rec-
ognised as having influenced their practices, and having read recently were of US origin, ex-
cept for one. Quite similar results, using the same questionnaire developed by CEMP have
just been obtained in Norway (Amdam, 2002). In addition, in both countries, the Harvard
Business Review is the most popular and influential managerial publication. Results from both
countries are also similar – just as in Denmark, Italy and France (cf. Report 5, i.e. Alvarez,
Mazza and Mur, 1999) – in terms of the diffusion of business newspapers: one or two national
52

usiness newspapers and a strong position for The Financial Times. In conclusion, the data
available unequivocally suggest that the readership habits of managers all over Europe tend to
be quite the same in content and in types of publications, and the national differences are be-
coming less relevant, both in terms of consumption and production-diffusion.
3.3.2.4.3. Education
Even in education, although the national domain is still of great importance since the finance
and regulation of business schools are mainly rooted in national institutions, we have seen a
decreasing importance of the national domain over the last years. One expression of this phe-
nomenon is the Europeanisation process of accreditation. Today, EQUIS, that is the accredita-
tion award set up by efmd, has developed to the dominant standard of accreditation in Europe
(Amdam, 2001; Hedmo, 2002). In May 2001, fifty-one business schools were accredited by
EQUIS (Table 10).
Table 10. Business Schools Accredited by EQUIS, May 2001
Country Number of Schools
France 11
UK 11
Spain 4
Sweden 3
Denmark 2
Finland 2
Netherlands 2
Norway 2
Switzerland 2
Belgium 1
Germany 1
Ireland 1
Italy 1
Portugal 1
Non-European countries 8
Total 52
Source: www.efmd.be
Among the institutions accredited, countries with a historically strong accreditation
tradition at the national level (France and the United Kingdom) are particularly well repre-
53

sented. The tendency of reducing the importance of the national domain is strengthened by the
increasing focus on international ranking of business schools, conducted by for instance the
Financial Times and Business Weeks. Studies of the web pages of business schools show that
schools accredited by efmd or mentioned in one of the ranking lists actively use these awards
in their external marketing to attract students.
3.3.2.5. Implications for Convergence
At the time of the design of the CEMP programme the dominant reference was the conver-
gence of European business systems around either North American or European models. As
the programme has reached its end it is convergence due to globalisation that is rapidly be-
coming the domain of action that most scholars, policy makers and managers have in mind.
As summarised above and elaborated in detail with numerous examples throughout the
CEMP reports, we have found that there are several domains of business knowledge and prac-
tice that should be taken into account – from local to world wide. A consequence of the plu-
rality of domains is that there is convergence and homogenisation mostly at the European
level. However, there is also a retention of practices at the local level, depending of the type
of practice and industry, strength of national business system, etc. This is what we refer to as
polarisation. We thus agree with Guillén (2001) that there are both convergence and diversity,
and that globalisation encourages diversity, rather than restricts it:
What it is perhaps more distinctive about globalization is that it intensifies
our consciousness of the world as a whole, making us more aware of each
other, and perhaps more prone to be influenced by one another without necessarily
making us more like the other.
In addition CEMP research has made it possible to be more specific in regard to what do-
mains become more important and which ones diminish their impact. It suggests that nations,
in the third wave of the long development of co-evolution that we have adopted as historical
framework, are loosing relevance vis-à-vis, first, the increasing importance of local domains
and, second, the European domain.
Our research results are consistent with the reasoning of Nohria and Ghoshal (1997),
who argue that multinationals are structured in asymmetrical and changing ways, depending
on the local emergence of centres of operational excellence or competitiveness. Therefore,
there is no fixed centre. This lack of symmetry and of stability of centres of power reflects the
diminishing importance of the national systems rather well, in this particular case, the national
systems where the headquarters were located.
54

3.3.3. Contents: Convergence, Adaptation and the Blurring of Borders
3.3.3.1. Introduction
The second phase of the programme focused explicitly on the content of the knowledge pro-
vided by the different actors under study. However, already the first phase dealing with struc-
ture led to a model regarding the convergence of methods and ideas diffused and employed.
We will therefore in this section first discuss this model. Second, we will turn to the results
from the second phase and a model of content creation. In so doing we will turn to the organ-
isational level of the actors in the management knowledge industry. We will then discuss a
model for the analysis of factors influencing the services offered by individual academic insti-
tutions, media companies and consultancies. Already this model points to the significance of
the relationships between these actors and their clients. This was even more reinforced in the
third phase of the programme, which focused on institutions. In this way we have in the pro-
gramme been able to observe the significance of the blurring borders between the different
fields, which have important effects on contents.
3.3.3.2. A Model of Convergence
A basic argument of the research in relation to the four fields of management was that they all
contained strong pressures for homogenisation, or as we later on tended to call them, for con-
vergence. On the basis of the new institutionalists we argued that the behaviour in the four
fields converges as a result of coercion, norms and imitation (cf. above Section 2). These
forces were thus expected to lead to convergence within each of the four fields.
In addition to the tendencies for convergence within fields, interaction between the
fields was expected to reinforce the process of convergence even more. As products of in-
creasingly converging fields are interacting through the flow of graduates, publications, con-
sultancy advice and best practice, the whole system will have even stronger tendencies to
converge. These two circumstances was the point of departure for a model of convergence
(Figure 3), which was developed in Report 7 (Engwall, 1999). Already at this stage it had
been found that there is also a number of counteracting forces in the convergence process.
55

Figure 3. A Model of Convergence
Convergence Processes
Among Countries
Visible Actors
as Role Models
Interaction between
Fields of Management
+
+
+
–
Convergence
of Contents
Source: Revised version of a model presented in Report 7 (Engwall, 1999).
–
–
–
–
Structural Differences
Between Countries
Organisational
Inertia
Entries of New Actors
First (upper box to the right in Figure 3), there are structural differences between
countries in the form of differences in legal systems, industrial structure, culture, etc. How-
ever, this counteracting force is increasingly hampered by convergence processes among
countries (upper box to the left in Figure 3), i.e. that the nation state is loosing out (cf. the
previous section). Coercive pressures are coming through different kinds of international
agreements like those passed through organisations such as the United Nations, the General
Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), World Trade Organisation (WTO), and Organiza-
tion for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). In addition to the coercive pres-
sures appearing from these agreements we can also note processes of professionalisation and
imitation among countries. Certain norms of behaviour are developed as Prime Ministers, and
other Ministers come together at international meetings. In addition there are tendencies of
imitation as countries are competing for success in terms of economic growth and prosperity.
Another force that it hampering the convergence process is the entry of new actors
(lower right box of Figure 3). As a matter of fact this is the classical dynamic mechanism of
markets. Entries of new actors offer alternatives that are different than the existing ones. In
this way variation is increased. However, the more the total system of management is inte-
grated through the interaction between fields of management (lower left box of Figure 3), the
higher will be the barriers to entry, i.e. the difficulties for new actors to enter the field. As a
result we can expect that also this force against convergence be hampered.
56

A third factor, which can be expected to be the strongest counterbalancing factor, is
constituted by organisational inertia. It simply implies that the reception of new ideas can be
expected to take some time due to the resistance of organisational members. This inertia ap-
pears to be stronger as we move down to lower levels in organisations. Therefore, even if we
see strong pressures for convergence in the field as a whole, we have observed that these pres-
sures are decreasing as we move inside organisations.
Our conclusion from the first phase of the programme was therefore that is important
(1) to consider time explicitly, and (2) to acknowledge a number of counter-acting forces
against the pressures of convergence. Particularly we noted that organisational inertia is an
especially strong such counter-force as we move inside organisations.
3.3.3.3. A Model of Content Creation
In the second phase of the programme we focused more explicitly on the content of the ser-
vices provided. We were then (Report 11, i.e. Engwall and Pahlberg, 2001a) able to develop a
model regarding the interplay behind content creation (Figure 4). It was concluded that the
staff and the clients of the different actors constituted key groups in this context. In accor-
dance with earlier findings in industrial and service marketing (Grönroos, 1990 and Håkans-
son, 1982) we found that this interaction was crucial for the development of content in terms
of curricula, consultant advice and media output. This would mean that we should expect an
adaptive behaviour between management knowledge organisations and client organisations in
order to adapt to their needs. However, quite in accordance with the reasoning of the first
phase of the project this adaptation is hampered by competitors but also by evaluators. As
shown by Hedmo (2001) and Wedlin (2000), for instance, the latter are becoming increasingly
significant for the services provided in management education. However, also for the other
actors in the management field we can see similar evaluations taking place: media output are
under scrutiny by reviewers, ombudsmen and their audience, while consultants are increas-
ingly criticised and questioned in different forms (see e.g. Ernst and Kieser, 2002).
The focus on relationships between providers of management knowledge and their
clients is indeed significant for the CEMP research, since it adds another crucial process in the
diffusion of ideas and principles of management. At the outset we were more inclined to
stress the role of competitors and evaluators. Competitors, particularly the dominant ones,
were pointed out as instrumental both as norm setters and role models, thereby promoting
both professionalisation and imitation. They may even be able to influence coercive forces
through good relationships to legislating bodies. In the same way different kinds of evaluators
57

can be associated with coercive, normative and imitative forces. All this implies strong forces
for convergence unless there are not strong new actors entering the field (cf. above).
Figure 4. A Model of Content Creation
Competitors
Staff
CONTENTS
Client
Organisations
Evaluators
Footnote: The model is a development of a model presented in CEMP Report 11 (Engwall and Pahlberg, 2001a).
As we introduce the impact of staff and client organisations we have indeed two sig-
nificant forces for variation. In terms of staff it is clear that all of the organisations we are
dealing with in the CEMP programme are very dependent on the background and competence
of their staff. Thus even if top management of academic institutions, consultancies and media
companies were certain about the correct ways to proceed – which they not always are – they
cannot be sure how and what their staff members finally deliver to clients. Of course all of
them make use of (1) selective recruitment, i.e. they select persons who they think fit their
organisation, and (2) socialisation, i.e. they gradually make their staff more and more fit to the
organisation. Both these strategies indeed can be expected to lead to a convergence in behav-
iour, but individuals in knowledge organisations are seldom becoming templates. Instead their
behaviour will be very dependent on their earlier education and experience. In this context,
the tacit knowledge will be particularly important (see e.g. Baumard, 1999 and Nonaka and
Takeuchi, 1995).
If the individual characteristics of staff is important for the degree to which variation
occurs, the demand from clients is even more important. They constitute the outsiders, who
58

are able to ask for solutions to specific problems and to directly feed back their reactions on
the services provided. Needless to say these problems, solutions and reactions will be more
similar in mature and stable industries than in young and dynamic ones. Thus we expect com-
panies in dynamic industries to provide more incentives for variation in the content offered by
management knowledge organisations than stable ones.
3.3.3.4. Blurring of Boundaries and Networks of Relationships
As the programme developed it became successively clear that the system under study was a
bit different than originally envisaged. It became evident that the four fields are increasingly
overlapping and that their borders are becoming indistinct (Figure 5).
Figure 5. The Blurring of Boundaries
Academic
Institutions
Practice
Media
Companies
Consultancies
We have thus observed how academic institutions (i.e. business schools) become more
and more interconnected with consultancies, media companies and practice. Similarly the
other actors are working more and more in close relationships. The described tendencies are
particularly articulated for consultancies and we will therefore below provide evidence of
their interconnections with academic institutions and media companies.
3.3.3.4.1. Consultancies and Academic Institutions
As a part of the CEMP programme, we have examined the complex relationship between
management consultancies and graduate schools of business administration in a comparative
59

and historical perspective (cf. Kipping and Amorim, 2002). This research suggests that in the
European countries studied – mainly France, Germany, Portugal, Spain, Portugal and the
United Kingdom – the relationship went through different stages of development. These
stages occurred at different times in each of these countries, but show nevertheless remarkable
similarities. During a first stage, consultancies often acted as an alternative for general man-
agement training in the absence of graduate business schools in these countries. Subsequently,
domestic consultancies often established their own training centres both for clients and their
own consultants. By contrast, US consulting firms initially sent their staff to US business
schools and then contributed to the establishment of similar institutions in the host countries
(from the late 1950s onwards).
During the second stage consultancies – mostly those of American origin – could draw
on the growing number of business schools in Europe for their recruitment. It should be noted
that MBA degrees became only predominant among a few international consultancies operat-
ing in Europe. Most domestic service providers, but even some of the leading US consulting
firms, continued to rely on graduates of other disciplines at least in certain countries such as
Germany, where even McKinsey recruits mainly business economists and engineers. The rela-
tionship at this stage can be described as “symbiotic”. The leading business schools and the
top consultancies mutually reinforced each other, not only in terms of training, but also com-
mercially and socially, namely by improving credibility towards potential clients and by en-
hancing the status of the individual graduates and consultants. More recently consultancies
have come to play the role of “graduate graduate schools” (Mintzberg, 1996). Many MBA
graduates of the leading international business schools such as Harvard or INSEAD spend
some time working for one of the leading global consultancies, e.g. McKinsey or BCG, and
subsequently enter companies at the top management level. Examples of these career tracks
abound especially in the United States, but can also be found increasingly in Western Europe.
Over the last few years however, the complementary relationship between graduate
business schools and management consultancies of US origin appears increasingly shaky. To
a certain extent, it appears to have become victim of its own success. The general manage-
ment knowledge on which it was founded and which it helped to diffuse at an ever-increasing
scale and speed became fairly commonplace. Ideas such as the “multidivisional structure” or
the “portfolio matrix” which, respectively, made the fortune of McKinsey in Europe in the
1960s and BCG in the 1970s are now taught already at undergraduate level. New concepts are
popping up at very high rates (cf. Report 1, i.e. Lindvall, 1998) and are spread around the
60

globe very quickly and vanish sometimes so fast that they fail to make their way into the
business school curriculum.
These changes and the rapid succession of new management “fashions” or “fads”
mean that consultancies have to go beyond the level of general management knowledge to
demonstrate their usefulness. In terms of the background and training of new consultants, this
has also shifted the focus away from degrees providing general management knowledge such
as the MBA. In this respect it is crucial to distinguish between the selection function of the
business schools, which good ones among them will continue to fulfil, and their role as con-
veyors and transmitters of management knowledge (see further below Section 3.3.4), where
they are becoming less important, at least for the consultancies.
The large accountancies, which entered the consulting market at a larger scale during
the 1990s (see above 3.3.1), seem to have been the first to see the need for more specialist
training for their consultants. They have developed two basic ways of providing this training,
either through their own dedicated training centres or by creating customised products in col-
laboration with established educational institutions. Accenture (formerly Andersen Consult-
ing) is an example for the first approach. All its new consultants undergo a six-week introduc-
tory training at the consultancy’s own “University” near Chicago. PriceWaterhouseCoopers
follows the second approach, at least partially. It has jointly developed an MBA programme
with the University of Georgia, where some of their consultants are sent (see Management
Consultant International, August 1998). Incidentally, the need to invest more in staff training
is one of the reasons, why scale has become increasingly important in the consulting industry.
Only the large consultancies can actually make this effort. Not only is it costly to put more
resources into formal training for consultants, the time spent in training is also lost revenue,
because it cannot be billed to clients (Kipping and Scheybani, 1994).
But change is not limited to consultancies. Business schools have also evolved, often
in similar directions. Many of them increasingly customise their programmes, namely in ex-
ecutive development, according to the specific demands of the clients. Companies also estab-
lish “corporate universities”, often in conjunction with educational institutions. Individual
academics and consultants usually provide training there. As a result, the boundaries between
consultancies and business schools have become increasingly blurred. The time when consul-
tancies subcontracted most of the training of their consultants to graduate business schools
seems definitely passed. They will probably continue to recruit from these well-known
schools, but now mainly because they operate a very good pre-selection.
61

The question that has to remain unanswered for the time being is to what extent con-
sultancies and business schools will enter into open competition. So far consultancies have
only used their training centres for their own staff. But, given the costs of operating these fa-
cilities, they might eventually use them to provide training to their clients. One indication that
the development might go into this direction is the creation of “solution centres”, pioneered
by Andersen Consulting (now Accenture) in 1994 (Aldrick, 1998). They pool consultants
working towards the solution of particular problems. The idea is that by clustering expertise,
these centres will create spill-over effects. More importantly, however, is the fact, that clients
are invited to visit these centres, so that consultants can develop solutions for them in a
shorter time. This does not seem too far from a customised training centre, focusing, however,
not on general, but on highly specialised management knowledge.
3.3.3.4.2. Consultancies and Media
In terms of knowledge diffusion academic publications have been well scrutinised, whereas
the role of non-academic publications has hardly been considered. Among the small part of
consulting publications that have found attention in academic research have been the best
sellers written by gurus (see further Clark and Greatbatch, 2002 and Huczynsky, 1993). By
contrast, “normal” consultancy publications have not gained much attention, despite the fact
that consultancies are seen as such important and influential knowledge carriers. CEMP re-
search therefore did not focus on the exceptional successful guru books, but looked at how
consulting firms spread their knowledge, by examining the web-sites of the largest consultan-
cies operating in Western Europe (Claudia Gross in Report 13; i.e. Kipping and Armbrüster,
2000).
Our studies looked both at the books and articles promoted through these web-sites
and at the Internet as a means of spreading consulting knowledge. The analysis shows a group
of consultancies, namely McKinsey and the Boston Consulting Group, which rely quite ex-
tensively on traditional academic type publications such as books and journal articles. Here
the boundaries between management publications have clearly become blurred. McKinsey,
for example, originally modelled its Quarterly on the Harvard Business Review, also in terms
of layout (the similarity is now less visible, following changes introduced by the latter). Only
additional qualitative research can confirm whether this way of disseminating consultant
knowledge is driven by a desire to spread new insights to the academic and business school
community or by the aim to achieve high levels of visibility and respectability among a spe-
cific target group, i.e. top level managers.
62

Other consultancies, namely those related to the big five accountancies rely on non-
traditional ways of publishing, Internet based studies and newsletters (many of which are also
available in print). As always there are certain hybrids, such as Accenture, which publishes
both journal articles and studies, and exceptions, i.e. those who put little emphasis on publish-
ing – which can be found both among the traditional firms and the relative newcomers. It
seems nevertheless clear that some new ways of knowledge dissemination are developed by
the leading consultancies that complement other, more traditional forms of publication – and
might eventually rival them.
Research carried out in Germany also highlights the mutual interdependence between
consultancies and the publishing industry (Faust, 2002). It shows that consultants are using a
variety of media and arenas to establish their reputation as experts and trend-setters and vali-
date their knowledge. This includes for example articles in the business press and presenta-
tions to various associations regrouping German senior and middle managers. An analysis of
articles published between 1980 and 1996 in manager magazin, one of Germany’s leading
monthlies for business practitioners confirms that consultants play an important role as “cited
experts”. They are second in most years only to actual managers, whose share has been de-
creasing in the long run, however. On the other hand they are usually ahead of academics.
At the same time, the interviews during CEMP research have revealed the crucial role
of business journalists as “gatekeepers”, following the growing commodification of manage-
ment knowledge. While journalists rely to a certain extent on consultants and managers as
“heroes” for their stories, they also exercise a certain control over the access to these media
and therefore over the popular validation of the consultancy knowledge.
3.3.3.5. Implications for Convergence
CEMP research on the development of content – explicitly in the second phase and implicitly
in the first and third phases – points to the fact that there are considerable forces for conver-
gence: large visible actors constitute role models, their interaction reinforce convergence fur-
ther and national differences are diminished by convergence processes among countries.
However, national differences, particularly in education, still constitute significant counteract-
ing forces. The speed of convergence is also reduced by the entries of new actors and organ-
isational inertia. The latter is not only prevalent as individuals in client organisations resist the
introduction of new methods and approaches but also in organisations in the management
knowledge industry itself (i.e. in academic institutions, media companies and consultancies).
Such organisations are significantly dependent on their staff and their background. In the
63

same way the creation of content is also to a high extent a result of interaction with client or-
ganisations. In these relationships CEMP research has identified an increasing blurring of the
boundaries between the various fields of management. This in turn has led to the conclusion
that networks of relationships between individuals constitute significant features of the man-
agement knowledge industry (see Figure 6). The structure of these networks is crucial for the
convergence of content of management ideas and approaches. The tighter and more intercon-
nected these networks are, the stronger the forces for convergence and vice versa.
Figure 6. Management Knowledge in Networks of Relationships
Academic
Institutions
Practice
Media
Companies
3.3.4. Diffusion: From Transfer to Intermediation
3.3.4.1. Introduction
Consulting
As mentioned in Section 2 the original idea of the CEMP programme was to examine the ac-
tors within the management knowledge industry as carriers of management knowledge to
practice, and further, to examine whether these actors transfer new knowledge that contributes
to changing management practice. However, CEMP research has shown that the different
institutions within the management knowledge industry also have other functions. According
to our findings, in the third wave of management practice they have increasingly come to fo-
cus on intermediation activities. Thus, an important role is constituted by the provision of
64

legitimacy for management in relation to internal and external stakeholders. In addition, they
contribute to the creation of a common management language at a global level and to its
translation on the local level.
3.3.4.2. The Traditional View of the Diffusion of Management Knowledge
Within organisation studies the idea that management knowledge is something that can be
learnt is strongly rooted. However, already in the late 1950s, Penrose (1959) pointed out that
knowledge can be acquired in two ways (p. 53):
One can be formally taught, can be learned from other people or from the written word, and can, if
necessary, be formally expressed and transmitted to others. The other kind is also the result of
learning, but learning in the form of personal experience.
The formally taught knowledge is often acquired from education, reading different material,
and from interaction with other people, e.g. other managers and consultants. The focus on this
type of knowledge has been manifested in research during the 1980s and the 1990s. In the
original design it was therefore natural to focus on the formal knowledge and to take as a
point of departure that the transfer of knowledge to practice constitutes the main function of
the carriers. However, already in our literature reviews (Reports 1, 2 and 4, i.e. Lindvall,
1998; Kipping and Armbrüster, 1998 and Amdam and Kvålshaugen, 1999) it was found that
this view needs to be modified. Our research findings suggest that in the third wave of man-
agement practice the function of the actors within the management knowledge industry has
become more complex. These findings are consistent with arguments of Gibbons et al. (1994)
and Nowotny et al. (2001) regarding the changing character of the production of scientific
knowledge in the modern society.
3.3.4.3. Evidence against the Traditional View
There are several reasons why we should modify the traditional view regarding the role of the
above mentioned carriers as diffusers of management knowledge. Concerning education, al-
ready Piaget (1969) expressed doubts about the actual knowledge acquired by students during
their education. Further, Porter and McKibbin (1988) showed that business graduates were
neither particularly well prepared for handling various day-to-day realities of the business
world, nor had they acquired the necessary basic communication and management skills.
Within the CEMP programme Ragnhild Kvålshaugen compared 551 Norwegian man-
agers with business and engineering education in order to examine the relationship between
their educational background and their problem solving strategies and managerial behaviour.
65

Her study could not provide any evidence of a strong relationship between education and
practice. The only significant difference that could be established was that the engineers were
more entrepreneurial oriented (see further Report 14, i.e. Kvålshaugen 2001).
In addition, a study of the reading habits of managers in Spain (Report 10, i.e. Alvarez
and Mazza, 2000) and a replication study in Norway (Amdam, 2002) suggest that managers
do not follow scholarly literature on management. Instead their main source of managerial
news and information in the media is newspapers, both local and international, and weeklies.
This is consistent with the findings of Carlson (1951) already fifty years ago that managers do
not have much time for reflection. The popular press and best sellers therefore provide clear
advantages to managers as screening devices for reading selection. To executives, then, being
attentive to popular media facilitates being up to date with recent business events and trends
as well as a changing vocabulary.
Further, the results from a questionnaire filled in by 242 managers in Swedish based
MNCs pointed out that the role of universities was rather limited when it comes to the diffu-
sion of new ideas (CEMP Report 3, i.e. Lindvall and Pahlberg, 1998). Literature played a
somewhat more important role, but the most significant source was considered to be other
companies. Two-thirds of the respondents thus considered such entities as “very important”,
or even, “extremely important” in the diffusion of new ideas.
While the surveys and interviews (see Amorim, 2001 and Strambach, 2001) confirm
that the use of consultancies has become a very widespread phenomenon during the 1990s,
case studies conducted within the CEMP programme suggest caution regarding the implica-
tions of these findings for the transfer of management knowledge. This becomes very clear,
for example, in our detailed study of the transformation of the Dutch banking sector (Ar-
noldus, 2000; Arnoldus and Dankers, 2001), where all institutions from a wide variety of tra-
ditions evolved in a similar direction towards full-service commercial banks. Some of them
made extensive use of consultants in the process, while others did so very rarely or not at all.
Other company case studies of the introduction of quality management in automobile suppli-
ers in Portugal and Spain lead to a very similar result. Here the vast majority of the companies
used consultancies. However, a number of other factors, namely the commitment of top man-
agement, proved to be much more important in determining the outcome of the process in
terms of the changes in actual practice (Amorim, 2001). These findings suggest that consult-
ants may have other functions than primarily knowledge transfer.
66

3.3.4.4. An Alternative View
CEMP research suggests that to an increasing degree the institutions within the management
knowledge industry have come to provide internal and external legitimisation for managers.
They also facilitate the creation of a common management language and its translation to lo-
cal contexts.
3.3.4.4.1. Legitimisation
As already pointed out above the CEMP programme has showed that there are strong national
variations in Europe concerning the typical educational background of a top manager (Report
14, i.e. Kvålshaugen, 2001a and Kvålshaugen, 2001b). It may be difficult to explain for in-
stance why the German business community has favoured graduates from technical universi-
ties or Handelshochschulen with emphasis on functional disciplines. In addition the French
case shows that a significant role of the best grandes écoles is to provide legitimacy, and to
contribute to the maintenance of social reproduction.
This legitimisation function has been underlined within the CEMP programme by
Ragnhild Kvålshaugen (2001b and in Report 14) in a comparative overview where she con-
trasts the French, the German and the Norwegian system of management recruitment. A rela-
tionship between the nation’s institutional characteristics – co-ordination and control systems,
business culture, and conceptions of management – and the types of educational background
that are seen as appropriate for managers are identified. This suggests that educational back-
ground serves as a legitimating factor influencing what types of graduates that are seen as
appropriate in management positions. These results are consistent with the so-called “screen-
ing hypothesis” within economics of education. This hypothesis implies that the earning dif-
ferences between graduates and non-graduates are due to the role of higher education in se-
lecting students with attributes, such as intellectual ability, high motivation, and willingness to
work hard (Williams, 1984, p. 81). Hence, we could argue that the main function of manage-
ment education is not to transfer knowledge, but to select future managers.
The increasing importance of the MBA model (see above 3.3.1.3.3) could be ex-
plained within this framework, too. Since businesses are becoming more international, and the
different stakeholders are becoming more and more demanding, managers need an education
with an international flavour in order not to loose legitimacy.
CEMP studies of the business press also indicate that managers seem to be “practical
neo-institutionalists” in the sense that they distinguish between usefulness and reputation.
Report 10 (Alvarez and Mazza, 200) thus shows how Spanish managers decouple both crite-
67

ia. They know that academic publications have very high reputation. However, in line with
the work of Argyris (1990) they affirm that the most useful source of learning and knowledge
is their day-to-day interaction with colleagues and superiors. At the same time these managers
use the popular press and best sellers for self-legitimacy in addition to the more direct objec-
tive of information gathering.
Similarly, a comparison of case studies regarding the introduction of quality manage-
ment in Portuguese and Spanish automobile suppliers shows that most of them paid “lip ser-
vice” to the quality gospel, but that this did not automatically imply the application of these
ideas in practice (Amorim, 2001). In some of the cases the introduction of TQM appear to
“have failed”, i.e. did not lead to the modification of existing routines. This might be because
in fact they never got implemented. Here, changes might have been more rhetoric than real.
The TQM programme exhorted people to alter their behaviour but the ultimate interest was
the achievement of a quality certificate.
The idea that consultants have a legitimising role in internal conflicts and with respect
to external stakeholders of organisations is not new. Jackall (1988, p. 144) already suggested
that managers hire consultants to
legitimate already desired unpleasant changes, such as reorganisations; throw
rival networks of executives off the track of one’s real strategy by diverting
resources to marginal problems; undercut consultants employed by other executive
groups by establishing what might be called counterplausibility; or
advance […] a personal or organizational image of being up-to-date, with it,
and avant-garde.
Similar arguments have been made by Faust (2000), Kieser (1998), and Kipping (2000). The
contribution of CEMP research in this respect is twofold. First, it shows that before being able
to play such a legitimising role, consultants need to establish their own legitimacy – a process
that differs significantly from one European country to the next. Second, based on a large
number of case studies it has shown that the role of consultancies in providing legitimacy is
often contested.
Regarding legitimacy, CEMP research suggests that it usually comes in the guise of
“knowledge”. In other words: the consultants will only be able to justify certain decisions or
support a particular course of action, based on the superiority of their knowledge. However,
due to the very nature of the consultancy service, and the changing nature of the underlying
knowledge it is very difficult to prove such superiority (cf. Clark, 1995; Clark and Salaman,
1998; Mitchell, 1994; Sauviat, 1994). In each national contact consultants find different ways
68

to signal the quality of their knowledge, i.e. their legitimacy, usually by tying up with other
knowledge providers (Kipping and Engwall, 2002).
Regarding the external and internal legitimacy provided by consultants, our case study
research has indeed confirmed that top managers often employ them to “justify” their actions
with respect to outsiders or their employees. More importantly, our research also showed that
in many of these cases the legitimacy with which consultants were supposed to provide their
clients was very often contested. Scepticism and resistance usually came from the organisa-
tion members directly concerned, i.e. workers and middle managers. Interestingly, the argu-
ments used by those opposed to the consultancy recommendations were usually formulated in
terms of the knowledge of the consultants. At the same time, our detailed case studies also
revealed that top managers usually employed a variety of consultants to overcome the resis-
tance from the inside stakeholders.
The case studies further show that the reputation of the consultancy did not automati-
cally guarantee the acceptance of its recommendations inside the company. In many cases
most middle managers have remained reluctant or even hostile towards the outsiders. They
perceived the consultants as willing executors of top management decisions, derided them in
internal communications, and more or less openly questioned their competence; a hostility
that ultimately prevented the implementation of the consultancy recommendations.
Kipping and Armbrüster (2002) identify how the management of the client organisa-
tion tried to overcome these problems and maintain the legitimacy provided by the consultants
for their decisions. The reactions of top management included: (1) removing some of the most
contested features of the consultancy recommendations, (2) negotiating the solution with
those directly concerned, or even (3) “deception”, in this case pretending that the consultants
were employees of the company in question rather than outsiders. More in general, the avail-
able evidence from these cases suggests that in order to carry out changes within their own
organisations, managers could not rely only on the legitimacy of the knowledge provided by
the outside consultants. They also needed to enlist the active support of those concerned, dur-
ing and beyond the consultancy project.
3.3.4.4.2. Creation of a Common Language and its Translation
The research in the CEMP programme shows that another important function of the actors
within the management knowledge industry is to provide managers with a common language.
This was already emphasised in the first report of the programme (Lindvall, 1998, i.e. Report
1). The subsequent research provided further evidence. With respect to education there is for
69

example a certain tendency of cross-national convergence concerning reading assignments in
business schools (Report 11, i.e. Engwall and Pahlberg, 2001a and Report 12, i.e. Amdam,
Larsen and Kvålshaugen, 2002). The management books mentioned in our surveys as most
influential are also increasingly similar across Europe (Report 10, i.e. Alvarez and Mazza,
2000; and Amdam, 2002). By reading the same books at business schools and by reading the
international business press, managers across Europe not only legitimise their actions but also
acquire a common language that enables them to communicate with each other. This tendency
is strengthened by the fact that they to an increasing degree use the same consultants (Report
6, i.e. Kipping and Armbrüster, 1999 and Report 16, i.e. Kipping, 2001).
However, this does not necessarily mean that companies act in the same way, although
they use the same labels for what they are doing. CEMP research has thus pointed out that
labels are often used as rhetoric to cover a wide range of activities. When analysing the use of
a label, it is thus important to keep in mind that management practice indeed is a question
about events and behaviour in individual organisations. Studies of these events indicate that
things that appear homogeneous at a high level of description are heterogeneous at lower lev-
els. We can thus talk about “a heterogeneity in the homogeneity”. Another way to express it is
that we expect different ideas and concepts to be represented differently in different contexts.
In practice we thus observe hybrids, “bits and pieces”, and all sorts of combinations between
organisations but also inside individual organisations, particularly as we observe them over
time.
As noted in Report 1 (Lindvall, 1998), some concepts are closed, with little opportu-
nity for users to create their own definitions. Others are open, with many possibilities for us-
ers to shape their own definitions, but the majority is probably “half-open”. In relation to this
distinction it is important to point out that even such concepts that we tend to consider as pre-
cise and closed may lead to variation in practice. One such example is the quality approach
ISO 9000, which despite its very elaborated specifications leads to variations in practice (see
Amorim, 2001). Both within firms and among external counterparts, such as consultants, this
is a favourable situation since it enables them to translate the concepts and related practices to
the specific situation and company. This can facilitate both the introduction of a new concept
as well as its use.
From evidence presented at the final conference in the CEMP programme it appears
appropriate to look at three aspects which are significant for the far from perfect representa-
tions that we find in practice. First, we may talk about communication aspects, second about
processes of transformation, and finally the decoupling of ideas and practice (see Table 11).
70

All three are appropriate to consider both in terms of top management and the organisation as
a whole. On the first level we find the important promoters, who employ carriers, mainly con-
sultants, for projects of dissemination. As we move toward the organisation level we may
consider the effects of characteristics like size, history, administrative intensity, etc.
Table 11. Three Aspects of Idea Diffusion in Organisations
Level Communication Transformation Decoupling
Top Management (1) Imperfect presentation (2) Translation, editing, etc. (3) Window-dressing, rhetoric
Organisation (4) Lack of absorptive capacity (5) Power struggles (6) Routinisation over time
Source: Concluding remarks at the CEMP final conference in Molde.
Starting out at top management level it is evident that even if top management has a
perfect acquaintance of the ideas to be distributed we may expect them to have difficulties to
communicate them properly (1 in Table 11). However, we can also expect that top managers
consciously change the original ideas to suit their purposes (2). This is what in the literature is
called translation and editing (Czarniawska and Joerges, 1996; Latour, 1986 and Sahlin-
Andersson, 1996). In addition there is considerable evidence that concepts and procedures are
used by top-managers just as a part of rhetoric and a window-dressing in relation to various
stakeholders (3).
Looking at the organisation as a whole we have in terms of communication observed
the lack of absorptive capacity (4), which of course is very much dependent on the need for
the organisation to pursue its main tasks. These are likely to dominate the introduction of new
ideas, particularly if they are not related to problems that are identified as important by or-
ganisation members. These are also likely to be reluctant to accept the new ideas introduced
by top management, since they in many cases will interfere with developed praxis and power
structures (5). The reluctance is also to be expected from the fact that the introduction of new
management ideas always has some implications for the power structure and resource alloca-
tion in the organisation. Therefore, the introduction of new ideas or principles often implies
that some parts of the organisation are more willing to take new ideas on board than others
are. Finally, we should also note that over time there might also on the organisational level be
a decoupling between the ideas and actual practice. In this instance it is a question of routini-
71

sation over time that means that people say that they work according to certain principles al-
though they in practice have adopted new ones (6).
In the translation or editing of new concepts our research has highlighted the role of
small, local consultancies (Crucini and Kipping, 2001). Interviews of consultants and client
organisations in Italy suggest that the translation process takes place in two main ways. First
of all, it implies a simplification of language and meanings from labels to real and under-
standable practices. This also includes the intermediation with third parties, such as software
houses and banks. Secondly, it consists of an adaptation or personalisation of the consulting
approaches for the specific needs and characteristics of clients.
At first sight, the linguistic problem appears to be a minor issue within consulting pro-
cesses. However, from what emerges from the interviews held with Italian consultants this
does not seem to be the case. Crucini and Kipping (2001, p. 253) thus report the following
answer from a respondent: “Sometimes the use of foreign terms, even the names of the most
well-known practices such as Business Process Reengineering, or Just-in-Time, creates con-
fusion and diffidence”. This quote suggests that the main translation involves the language
and not the contents. Closely connected to this is the kind of translation that occurs when con-
sultants act as intermediaries between clients and third parties. From the evidence collected in
Italy, it seems possible to distinguish two main kinds of intermediation. The first one takes
place when the consultants use their knowledge to facilitate or to implement very technical
changes in the client organisation. This happens for example when the clients, without assis-
tance, buy some software products or starts to negotiate with software houses without realis-
ing that they lack the technical skills to evaluate or implement what they are buying. A similar
process might take place when clients have had a previous negative experience with other
consultancies that have left them with the bill and a report but no real solutions. In this case,
the consultant has to translate words into facts and conduct the implementation process within
the client firm. The second type of intermediation appears less frequent, and it takes place
when the consultant mediates between the client and financial institutions or between the cli-
ent and suppliers.
Overall therefore, the small, local consulting firms seem to offer their clients a kind of
personal translation of the available labels and knowledge. The personal relationships be-
tween the parties seem to facilitate the understanding and the acceptance of the consulting
service. Thanks to the trust emerging from these relationships, the consultant becomes a sort
of additional partner, a constant presence within the client organisation. In other words, it
seems that mutual understanding and trust very often facilitate the implementation of consult-
72

ing knowledge without really changing the contents, thus contributing to the convergence of
practice, despite an adaptation and translation of labels into more understandable terminology.
3.3.4.5. Implications for Convergence
The research on diffusion in the third phase of the CEMP programme has revealed that
institutions within the management knowledge industry do not only transfer management
knowledge. They appear increasingly to also provide legitimisation and translate general
management ideas into local contexts. Consequently, the view that these institutions diffuse
management knowledge needs to be supplemented by the view that they serve as
intermediators. Since the management knowledge industry is providing legitimisation as well
as the creation of a common language, managers use this industry to secure their position and
influence the different stakeholders. CEMP research thus suggests that there has been an
increase over time in the significance of actors mediating between managers and company
stakeholders. It also suggests that the use of intermediaries is positively related to the
uncertainty of a company’s industry, i.e. the larger uncertainty as a result of
internationalisation, ownership dispersion and competition, the larger the use of
intermediaries. Finally, it suggests that management in companies is developing long-term
relationship to mediators in order to get access to critical resources.
These observations have implications for the question of convergence. Obviously,
there is a clear tendency of convergence in Europe on the discourse level, or what we here
have called the level of labels. The frequent consumption of the services provided by the
business schools, management consultants and business press, also contributes to a conver-
gence concerning management language. However, as Section 3.3.2 has shown, there is a
tendency of polarisation among these institutions. At the same time as they are becoming
more global, they also strengthen their local position. The function of the local institution is
twofold. One the one hand, they contribute to convergence at the discursive level. On the
other hand, since they also function as translators of global messages to local contexts, they
serve as constraints regarding the convergence of management practice.
3.4. CONCLUDING REMARKS
It should be evident from the above that the CEMP programme has employed a systematic
approach to cover the different aspects of the management knowledge industry. In so doing,
the programme has employed a variety of methods in order to acquire different kinds of evi-
dence and perspectives. This approach has implied that the research has been able to question
73

some of the earlier assumptions of the programme and to acquire a deeper and better under-
standing of the research object. This in turn has led to conclusions and policy implications,
which will be dealt with in the following section.
4.1. CONCLUSIONS
4. CONCLUSIONS AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS
The results summarised above will in this section be related to the main research objects of
the CEMP programme. In the latter part of the section, future need for research will be identi-
fied and policy implications will be highlighted.
4.1.1. Institutions of Management Knowledge and the Convergence of European Business
Practice
As described in Section 1 the CEMP programme had three objectives. The first was:
to judge to what extent education, research and consulting are contributing to a
homogenisation in European business practice.
In part 3.3.1 it was shown that management practice has evolved in waves, which differ sig-
nificantly in terms of the dominant ideas, the focus of management attention, and the role of
top managers. The most recent shift has emerged in the last two decades and became increas-
ingly dominant during the 1990s. In this period the emphasis started to shift from corporate
organisation and strategy towards the management of internal and external relationships. The
co-ordination and control of such intra- and inter-organisational networks is partly enabled
through the fast development of information technology. A number of new management prac-
tices, concepts and tools have rapidly evolved at the same time, as there has been a tremen-
dous rise of the management knowledge industry. However, there are differences between the
fields in terms of their reaction to the changes in management practice. While popular man-
agement publications and consulting seem to be first in capturing new trends, there is more
inertia when it comes to academic publications and management education.
One of the distinctive features of the most recent wave is the polarisation of the struc-
ture within each of the three fields of the management knowledge industry (see Section 3.3.2).
While the national level is gradually losing influence, both the global and the local levels are
becoming more important. On the global level each field is characterised by the emergence of
large and highly visible actors pushing for convergence. CEMP data show that consultants
74

and a few media conglomerates are most advanced in terms of acting on a global level. There
are also a few international business schools. However, in general, management education
remains nationally driven. At the same time, parts of the management knowledge industry,
especially the small consultancies, are very active on the local level.
When it comes to content, we have observed a gradual blurring of the boundaries of
the fields (see section 3.3.3). The blurring occurs because some actors belong to several fields
and the fields are increasingly overlapping. For instance, consultants have started to co-
operate with business schools by organising joint events. At the same time business school are
offering consulting-type services in the form of tailor-made programmes for specific compa-
nies. Media companies have also expanded their education-related activities. Some publishing
companies have for example started to organise training events. They are also influencing
education through ranking of business schools. In the same way companies are increasingly
affecting educational institutions through external academic funding and the participation in
accreditation projects. As a result of all these developments, there is a tendency for the man-
agement knowledge industry as a whole to use the same labels and to diffuse similar ideas.
Concerning diffusion, CEMP research confirms the importance of management educa-
tion, media and consulting. However, their function is not limited to the transfer of manage-
ment knowledge. In the third wave of management practice companies have to an increasing
extent to defend their action in relation to various internal and external stakeholders, espe-
cially players on the global financial markets. The legitimisation function of the different in-
stitutions within the management knowledge industry has therefore increased significantly.
There is also strong evidence for a growing importance of these institutions in the promotion
of convergence at the discourse level. They especially contribute to the creation of a common
management language and its translation to a local context. For the latter, local actors play a
significant role as translators for global models.
Overall it is clear that consultants and parts of the media are the most important actors
promoting convergence. They do this by diffusing standardised labels globally and by trans-
lating them into local and national contexts. In comparison education is still dominated by
national institutions, which means that they have less of influence on the convergence proc-
ess. Due to the blurring of boundaries the labels and underlying ideas are becoming increas-
ingly similar across all of the institutions. However, despite these strong tendencies for con-
vergence, there is considerable room for variation at the organisational level. This is due to
the possibility of actors to de-couple labels from practice as well as the translation taking
75

place at local levels. In this context it should be noted that neither de-coupling nor translation
are necessarily smooth and uncontested processes.
CEMP research also shows that most of the dominant and visible actors at the global
level in consulting and media, but to a more limited extent in education, are of American ori-
gin and ownership. This means that the role models and the providers of labels and underlying
ideas for European actors are coming from the United States. The main role of the European
actors seems to be the translation of these labels and ideas into the local context. Thus, some
of the ideas originating in European management practice might be packaged and sold back to
Europe by dominant US actors in the management knowledge industry. The fact that most
ideas are packaged in the United States might also be behind the extent of de-coupling and the
friction occurring in the translation process in Europe.
4.1.2. Differences between Different Parts of Europe
A second object of the CEMP programme was
to determine whether this homogenisation is more developed in some parts of
Europe than in others.
Concerning education the programme has primarily categorised different regions in Europe
according to how they have responded to the influence for the American system of manage-
ment education (Engwall and Zamagni, 1998). It is those parts of Europe that first developed
their own indigenous traditions in business education that show the largest resistance to the
American model. The pre-eminent example is Germany, with its own tradition of business
economics. In Germany the modern MBA programmes have not gained any strong influence
in the German business schools (Handelshochschulen). Another example of a country that has
shown resistance to the US system is France.
Countries where the American model has been regarded as a challenge to university
education constitute another group. Italy and Spain are among those countries. A third group
consists of countries where the American model has contributed to change a German model.
The Nordic countries have gradually adopted the American business administration model
within an organisational setting based on the German model. Also the Netherlands show a
dual pattern by adopting both the German and American models within university structures.
Finally, the last category is the late adopters of the American model. The United Kingdom
76

plays an important role within that category, since it is the country where the MBA pro-
grammes have expanded most rapidly in Europe.
Since media is a highly heterogeneous field (general and specialised newspapers, aca-
demic research publications (books and journals) and university textbooks, magazines, popu-
lar books, etc.) the strategy of the CEMP research has been to examine in-depth three coun-
tries of different European business systems. They are (1) Denmark (as representative of Nor-
dic business systems), (2) the United Kingdom; and (3) Italy (complemented with data from
France and Spain as a representative of a Southern European system). Regarding the structure
of the field (types of media and relationships among types), it seems remarkably equivalent
across business systems. In each of the countries studied there are one or two well-established
newspapers specialised in business and economics with significant circulation, and a number
of other specialised periodicals selling far fewer copies. All the important general newspapers
carry sections on management. In each of the countries studied there are also one or two
weeklies or monthlies usually patterned both in layout and content after the US examples of
Business Week or Fortune.
The United Kingdom is the only country whose periodicals enjoy a wide readership in
other European countries, de facto becoming, European publications. However, they never
reach the circulation of the national business newspapers. At the same time they act as role
models for the national business periodicals in terms of design and content. Similarly, in book
publishing there are some trends towards the emergence of a few dominant European actors
such as Pearson.
Despite national ownership of most media companies there are some indications for
the increasing similarity of content. Business, management and economic matters have be-
come an important part of the information available through the press, both daily and periodi-
cal. In the three countries explored, the “explosion” of the importance of these topics occurred
in a similar point in time (mid-1980’s), with an ideological celebration of market forces and a
sort of popular capitalism (both through entrepreneurship and through easier access to stock
exchanges). In sum, there is a very high structural equivalence in the media, and increasing
convergence of content across European business systems.
In terms of the consulting field, CEMP research revealed considerable differences in
terms of the supply and the consumption of consultancy services in different parts of Europe.
Table 12 thus suggests broadly a North-South divide, with Germany, the Netherlands, the
Nordic countries and the Untied Kingdom showing a significant level of consulting activities
relative to their GDP (which we called “intensity”). Among the southern European countries
77

consulting activities appear highest in Spain. This means that large companies in these coun-
tries have fairly easy and rapid access to new management concepts through the consultancies
– a fact confirmed by our case study research (Report 16, i.e. Kipping, 2001). In terms of
convergence, we also need to take into account factors determining the speed and extent to
which these concepts are subsequently diffused throughout these economies. Here we need to
look at the concentration of consultancy markets (where a low level indicates the presence of
many small, usually locally based consultancies) and the reach of the consultants (where a
high value suggests that consultancies also count many small and medium sized companies
among their clients). According to these criteria, new management concepts can be expected
to diffuse most widely in Germany, the Nordic countries, the Netherlands and Italy.
Table 12. Dimensions of the Consultancy Fields in Western Europe
Characteristics
Level of
Development
Supply Side Demand Side
Size of
Consultancies
Origin of
Consultancies
Service Type Client Type:
Activity
Client Type:
Area Intensity Concentration Americanisation Strategy Focus Coverage Reach
Nordic Countries Medium Medium Medium/Low High Medium/High High
United Kingdom High High High Medium High Medium
The Netherlands Medium High Medium High High Medium/High
Germany High Low Low/Medium High Medium Very High
France Medium/Low Medium Medium Medium/High Medium/Low Medium
Italy Low/Medium Low Low Medium Low High/Medium
Spain Medium Medium/High Low/Medium Low Medium/Low Medium/Low
Source: CEMP Report No. 6 (Kipping and Armbrüster, 1999).
Combining these two observations, we can therefore conclude that new management
concepts will disseminate quickly and widely in Germany, the Nordic countries and the Neth-
erlands. In the United Kingdom and Spain, they will also be received fairly rapidly, but their
use will largely remain confined to a few, especially international companies. The situation in
France and Italy is somewhere in the middle, because new management concepts are likely to
reach them later. In the Italian case, though, subsequent convergence is likely to occur fairly
quickly, especially in the more developed regions of the country, due to the presence of many
small, locally based consultancies.
78
Size

Overall CEMP research thus shows that there are certain differences in the speed and
extent of the convergence process in the various parts of Europe. Our results indicate that
these differences are mainly driven by (1) the existence of global management knowledge
institutions, and (2) language capabilities in a given country. Not surprisingly therefore, the
United Kingdom is usually early in Europe to adopt new management concepts and ideas.
However, the data can only confirm this for London and the south-east of England. Due to its
strong position in management education and publishing the London based institutions are
spreading new ideas inside and outside Europe.
Concerning other parts of Europe, the Scandinavian countries appear to be fast to
adapt new management ideas (see Report 3, i.e. Lindvall and Pahlberg, 1998) due to a high
fluency in English and the existence of global actors. In middle Europe, Germany and the
Netherlands are also rapid to acquire new ideas due to the presence of global actors, mainly
consultants, and the availability of local translators (cf. evidence on quality models, Report
16, i.e. Kipping, 2001). In France, however, new concepts appear to be adopted later and to a
lesser extent. The southern European countries also show a diverse picture. While in Spain
business schools and consultancies diffuse new ideas to the large companies, there are doubts
regarding the diffusion to small companies. Like France, Italy appears to be less influenced by
global management ideas, although there are regional variations (Report 6, i.e. Kipping and
Armbrüster, 1999).
4.1.3. Theory Development
The CEMP programme was from the beginning influenced mainly by two well-known re-
search traditions within organisational studies: the new institutional theory and business sys-
tems approach. Although both approaches have been very helpful for the programme they
have also been found of having some limitations. While the first has appeared too narrow for
the understanding of the convergence of management practice, the latter has been found less
relevant because the national dimension has become less important for the activities of the
management knowledge industry.
Hence, other theories might better explain developments within the management
knowledge industry and its relation to practice. In the choice between alternative approaches
those focusing on exchange and intermediation have been found to be particularly useful. For
the future the group considers dynamic theories on networks and on stakeholder relationships
to have an especially strength as analytical tools. In addition, it appears important to take
rhetoric into consideration to an increasing extent in the analysis.
79

4.1.4. The Importance of the European Dimension in the Research
The focus of the CEMP programme on the creation of European management practice has of
course implied that the European dimension has been central in the research. The studies un-
dertaken have thus covered a large number of European countries (cf. Section 3.2.3 above).
This has been accomplished through a co-operation with sub-contractors and colleagues
throughout Europe. As will be pointed out in Section 5.2 below this means that representa-
tives from most countries within the European Union (exceptions were Belgium, Luxembourg
and Greece) have been involved in the programme in one way or another. In addition, persons
from non-member European countries (Norway and Switzerland) and non-European countries
(Australia, Canada, Israel, New Zealand, Turkey and the United States) have participated in
CEMP events. This has no doubt implied a communication of European ideas to a wide audi-
ence.
Also in terms of the presentation of the results CEMP researchers have succeeded to
cover most of the European countries (cf. further Section 5.2). Of the more than one hundred
presentations about one-third were made in Northern Europe, and one-third in mid-European
countries, while about one-sixth each was made in Southern Europe and overseas, respec-
tively.
It can thus be no doubt that the CEMP programme has had a strong European dimen-
sion. This has been true both in terms of the object of study – the creation of European man-
agement practice – and in terms of collaboration between scientists and dissemination of re-
search results. For the CEMP team this has been a most rewarding experience.
4.2. FURTHER RESEARCH
At the same time as the research within the CEMP programme has resulted in a number of
publications and presentations, it has also raised new research questions. Among these the
CEMP team has particularly found it important to devote further research to the increasing
importance of intermediation between corporate managers and stakeholders provided by a
wide range of intermediaries, i.e. organisations assisting companies to interact with their in-
creasingly complex environment. These intermediaries do not only provide expertise but also
legitimisation, communication, and networks of relationships. For instance, in relation to fi-
nancial markets companies are increasingly relying on presentations through the media, often
supported by communication and image consultants, to make their shareholder value strate-
gies public. They also hire consulting firms to reinsure investors that they are following the
latest management practices. In labour markets recruitment consultants, headhunters, and
80

temp agencies constitute these intermediaries. In relation to civil society – which includes
consumer and environmental movements, ad hoc single-issue groups, etc. – companies use
services provided by public relations firms as well as specialists in community and social is-
sues. For their relationship with governments they increasingly employ professional lobbyists
and consulting firms in addition to their traditional representation via trade associations.
These developments raise serious concern regarding transparency and accountability.
In many instances, companies use intermediaries such as consultants to disguise their in-
volvement in controversial issues and "wrong-doings". There is also some evidence that com-
panies put the blame on intermediaries to avoid taking responsibility for unpopular decisions.
Against the described background the CEMP team has found it important to better
understand the emergence of these intermediaries and their role in helping management to
deal with financial markets, labour markets, civil society and governments. In so doing, a
step-wise approach is considered appropriate. First, the development and professionalisation
of these intermediaries will be examined, namely with respect to the traditional forms of rep-
resentation of stakeholder interests such as business associations or trade unions. Second, the
activities of these intermediaries in relation to both managers and the above mentioned stake-
holders will be analysed. Third, and finally, the intention is to analyse the response of differ-
ent stakeholders to the development of intermediaries and the increasing difficulty to appor-
tion responsibility.
The planned research, which has been given the name Responsibility in the Interme-
diation Society in Europe (RISE), builds on the results and experiences obtained within the
CEMP programme. However, it also implies a more profound analysis of significant proc-
esses in the modern society. In addition to the planned RISE programme a number of different
other research initiatives can be expected as a result of the interaction in the CEMP pro-
gramme.
4.3. POLICY IMPLICATIONS
Already at the outset of the CEMP programme it was expected that there would be significant
policy implications of the research. The third aim of the programme was therefore:
to contribute to an improvement of the European dimension in the diffusion and
consumption of management knowledge.
In relation to this aim we conclude that there is a strong need to promote learning and diffu-
sion of European best practices instead of depending on concepts developed and packaged
81

outside Europe. This conclusion results from our finding that there are strong forces for con-
vergence of management practice based on labels and ideas that originated in the United
States. A problem for managers in European companies is therefore that these labels and ideas
are not necessarily appropriate for the every-day practice in their companies. As a conse-
quence of this, one of the roles of the knowledge management industry in Europe is the trans-
lation of concepts developed and labelled overseas to a local context. The more remote these
labels and ideas are from the contexts where they are supposed to be applied, the more diffi-
cult it is to use them without major translations. Obviously, this is not an efficient process,
because such translations are usually costly in terms of human and financial resources.
Due to the dominance of American actors and ideas the wide range of European man-
agement best practices goes largely unnoticed. This variety provides an excellent source for
organisational learning and development. Currently this potential is not realised. Our most
important suggestion therefore is to find ways to take advantage of the available ideas in
Europe and encourage their dissemination. The diversity of management practices in itself is
an important model especially in the current network society. It should therefore be protected
and promoted within Europe and its transfer to other parts of the world could also be encour-
aged.
In order to realise the above-mentioned potential for organisational learning and de-
velopment from European best practices there is a need to use the best-suited existing institu-
tions and to develop alternative means of dissemination. Among the types of institutions ex-
amined in this research consulting and media are difficult to influence by public policies,
since they act on open markets. By contrast management education is more suitable because it
is to a large extent located in the public domain. However, it is still dominated by national
rather than Europe-wide interests and policies. In order to take advantage of the above-
mentioned variety there is a need for co-ordination and co-operation at the European level.
Although a number of steps have been taken in Europe to create the possibilities for faculty
and students to circulate among European management education institutions, we suggest
these initiatives are given more attention and resources. Priority should, for instance, be given
to the efforts to establish the recognition of courses and degrees throughout Europe. Further,
management degree programmes taking place in more than one country should be encour-
aged. We also suggest that the production as well as the use of European textbooks and other
teaching materials should be promoted.
For the same reasons as above, we emphasise the need for more research dealing with
the realities of business in Europe. The European Union has for a long time supported re-
82

search on technical innovations. As the development and diffusion of management practices
are essential for European business, we also suggest that research on European management
innovation should be promoted within existing programmes and possibly through special ac-
tions. These programmes should be based on a close co-operation between academia and the
European business community.
In addition to promoting European management education and research it is also nec-
essary to develop and support other arenas where management ideas can be exchanged and
further developed. This can take place both in more formally organised European professional
organisations and through informal gatherings such as round-tables and other loosely struc-
tured networks. Attempts should be made to widely diffuse the ideas generated in these fo-
rums through a close co-operation with European media companies particularly the popular
management press.
An important precondition for these learning and dissemination activities is language
proficiency. A central issue is therefore to actively support and promote language capabilities
in all European countries.
5. DISSEMINATION AND/OR EXPLOITATION OF RESULTS
5.1. INTRODUCTION
An important philosophy within the CEMP programme has been to put research results under
scrutiny through examination at conferences, workshops, and seminars and through publica-
tion review processes. Papers have been presented in a wide variety of disciplines, including
management and organisation studies, international business and business history. The vari-
ous events organised by the programme have also provided significant empirical input.
5.2. CONFERENCES, WORKSHOPS AND SEMINARS
During its existence the programme has organised all together 16 conferences, workshops and
seminars (see Annex 7.1). All in all these events have attracted 231 individuals from 115
institutions in 21 countries (see Table 13 and Annex 7.7). Since some persons have
participated in more than one event, the total number of participations is almost 400.
In terms of geographical representation, persons from most countries in the European
Union have been involved in the events. The two most represented countries are Sweden and
the United Kingdom, which is also the case in many other European conferences like the an-
nual EGOS Colloquia. Among countries in Europe outside the European Union, Norway is
83

well represented. The project has also attracted interest from researchers in Israel and Turkey
as well as in Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United States. When it comes to gender
distribution, it can be noted that about one-third of the participants have been women. Among
doctoral students involved in the project, the majority is female.
Table 13. Participation in the Events Arranged by the Programme
Country Number of Participants Number of Institutions Number of Participations
Australia 5 3 6
Austria 2 1 2
Canada 4 3 4
Denmark 18 3 28
Finland 15 8 18
France 20 13 22
Germany 12 7 19
Ireland 1 1 1
Israel 2 1 3
Italy 5 4 6
New Zealand 1 1 2
Norway 22 7 57
Portugal 1 1 1
Slovenia 1 1 1
Spain 10 4 21
Sweden 30 10 80
Switzerland 2 2 3
The Netherlands 16 7 28
Turkey 7 4 11
United Kingdom 48 31 73
USA 9 3 9
TOTAL 231 115 395
Source: The table is based on Annex 7.7. Four firms/consultancies that attended a round table in Toulouse in
June 2000 are included among the French institutions.
84

The EGOS Colloquium, organised each summer in different parts of Europe, has been
an important meeting-place for researchers interested in the project. During the first year of
the project, there was a CEMP-related track at the 14 th EGOS meeting in Maastricht. As a
result of the fruitful discussion there, the CEMP theme was accepted as a Standing Working
Group inside EGOS. Lars Engwall and José Luis Alvarez have been involved as convenors at
the EGOS meetings in Maastricht (1998), Warwick (1999) and Helsinki (2000) and Matthias
Kipping was responsible for the track in Lyon (2001). Each CEMP theme has also organised
workshops and conferences. The programme has highly benefited from research presented at
these events where some of the initial hypotheses also have been contested, refined and de-
veloped.
With the permission from the Commission one CEMP event in September 1999 was
also organised outside Europe. Lars Engwall together with Kerstin Sahlin-Andersson arranged
a workshop at SCANCOR at Stanford University on the theme “Carriers of Management
Knowledge”. This was of great value since American perspectives during the three days of
discussions could be contrasted to those of the Europeans. The American participants in-
cluded distinguished scholars such as professors James March, John Meyer and Walter Pow-
ell. Members of the Executive Group have also made presentations at the Academy of Man-
agement Meetings in Chicago in 1999 and Toronto 2000. At the 2001 meeting of the Acad-
emy in Washington, DC, the CEMP programme was even mentioned in the Presidential Ad-
dress (see further www.csom.umn.edu/wwwpages/faculty/vandeven/ahvhom.htm).
CEMP researchers have presented papers and results from the project at the above
mentioned events but also at a large number of conferences organised outside the project (see
Annex 7.3 and Table 14). Totally more than one hundred such presentations have been made,
of which the Executive Group members have accounted for about sixty per cent. Presentations
have been made in thirteen European countries and five countries overseas. For natural rea-
sons they have been most frequent in the years 1999 and 2000 (accounting for about three-
fourth).
Presentations have also been made to practitioners (see Annex 7.4). In terms of publi-
cations this has occurred in daily journals (El Pais and Svenska Dagbladet) and the periodical
efmd FORUM magazine (see Engwall and Pahlberg, 2000). Members of the Executive Group
have also met with politicians (the Swedish Minister of Education as well as the Sub-
committee on Education and Research of the Swedish parliament), company managers and
consultants.
85

Table 14. Country Coverage of Presentations by CEMP Researchers
Region Country 1998 1999 2000 2001 Total
North Denmark 1 3 1 2 7
Finland 4 5 9
Norway 1 5 1 3 10
Sweden 1 1 4 5 11
Subtotal North 3 13 11 10 37
Middle Austria 1 1
France 1 1 7 1 10
Germany 2 2
Switzerland 5 5
The Netherlands 4 1 5
UK 14 14
Subtotal Middle 11 17 8 1 37
South Italy 2 4 1 7
Portugal 1 1
Spain 4 2 6
Subtotal South 2 0 9 3 14
Overseas Australia 1 1
Canada 2 2
HongKong 1 1
Japan 1 1
USA 10 3 1 14
Subtotal Overseas 0 11 7 1 19
Total All Regions 16 41 35 15 107
Source: The table is based on Annex 7.3.
86

5.3. DOCTORAL PROGRAMMES AND DISSEMINATION TO STUDENTS
In June 2000, a summer school with the support of Nordic funding was arranged in Helsinki
for 25 doctoral students over the theme “The Diffusion of Modern Management Ideas”. The
theme co-ordinators in CEMP all participated as faculty. Another similar initiative has been
taken by Matthias Kipping by developing a MSc in International Consultancy and Account-
ing, which has been running at the University of Reading from the academic year 2000/01.
In Sweden a doctoral programme on “Management and IT”, in which CEMP-related
issues are treated, started in September 2001. In this unique programme, seven Swedish uni-
versities and university colleges are collaborating with Lars Engwall as chairman. The De-
partment of Business Studies in Uppsala has also been granted the status of Marie Curie
Training Site by the European Union as a result of its participation in the EUDOKMA pro-
gramme (The European Doctoral School on Knowledge and Management). The aim of this
programme, in which eight European academic institutions participate, is to promote research
programmes and doctoral training in knowledge and management. This project provides good
opportunities to discuss and diffuse the results of CEMP research.
CEMP research results have also been presented several times for doctoral students at
the Copenhagen Business School. Similarly lectures on CEMP results have been given to un-
dergraduates in business studies at Uppsala University, where also a CEMP-related doctoral
course was offered in 1999. Four doctoral dissertations by CEMP researchers have been fin-
ished (Rolv Petter Amdam, Haldor Byrkjeflot, Richard Danell and Ragnhild Kvålshaugen)
and four more are expected in 2002/2003 (Celeste Amorim, Cristina Crucini, Tina Hedmo and
Eirinn Larsen). In addition, other doctoral students affiliated to the CEMP programme are
expected to defend their theses in 2003.
5.4. PUBLICATIONS
In addition to the seventeen reports delivered to Brussels the results from the programme have
also been disseminated by CEMP researchers through 58 publications already published and
in 20 publications which are in press (see Annex 7.6 and Table 15). Seven of the publications
are books, four dissertations and two special issues of academic journals. In addition there are
30 articles, 24 book chapters, two book reviews and nine reports. Already in 1998 six publica-
tions came out of the programme and the following three years 17, 19 and 16 publications
appeared. A publication record on this level is expected in 2002, and for 2003 there is already
known that two books will be published. For 2004 Lars Engwall has agreed to edit a special
87

issue on the dissemination of management knowledge for an internationally recognised aca-
demic journal.
Table 15. Publications by CEMP Researchers
Type 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Total
Book 1 1 3 2 7
Dissertation 2 2 4
Special Issue 2 2
Article 4 9 15 2 30
Book Chapter 5 6 13 24
Book Review 2 2
Report 1 1 2 5 9
Total 6 17 19 16 18 2 78
Source: The table is based in Annex 7.6.
Of the books, Management Consulting: Emergence and Dynamics of a Knowledge
Industry (Oxford University Press, edited by Matthias Kipping and Lars Engwall), Carriers of
Management Knowledge: Ideas and their Circulation (Stanford University Press, edited by
Kerstin Sahlin-Andersson and Lars Engwall) and Inside the Business Schools: The Content of
Management Education in Europe (Abstrakt Press, edited by Rolv Petter Amdam, Ragnhild
Kvålshaugen and Eirinn Larsen) will be on the market during the spring of 2002. A volume
from the media theme (Alvarez, Mazza and Strandgaard, 2002) is under preparation. The in-
tention is also to publish a volume on the results presented in this final report.
Articles have been published in international journals such as Business and Economic
History, Enterprises et Histoire, Journal of Organizational Change Management and Organi-
zation Studies as well as in national journals. Special issues of the French journal Enterprises
et Historire and the Nordic journal Nordiske Organisasjonsstudier (Engwall and Sevón,
2000) focused on CEMP-related results. As already mentioned above, four doctoral disserta-
tions by CEMP scholars have been defended and additional ones are expected.
In terms of the language of publication, three-fourth of the publications are in English
(Table 16). The non-English publications are primarily articles, which have been published in
the above mentioned special issues.
88

Table 16. Language of the Publications Published by CEMP Researchers
Type English Non-English Total
Book 7 0 7
Dissertation 2 2 4
Special issue 0 2 2
Article 17 13 30
Book Chapter 21 3 24
Book Review 2 0 2
Report 9 0 9
Total 58 20 78
5.5. WEB-SITE
The project has been presented on a web-site (www.fek.uu.se/cemp) which was established in
1998/99 and continuously has been updated. On this site, a project description, the structure of
the programme, names and addresses to people involved as well as activities and publications
within the project are presented. The seventeen reports (see Annex 7.5) are also available
through this site.
5.6. CONTINUATION AND FOLLOW-UP OF RESULTS
The CEMP programme has created a high level of visibility and its results have stimulated
considerable discussion. Although the project has now formally come to its end, the network
of people involved will have several opportunities to meet and continue the work on the re-
search issues it has developed. The Special Working Group within EGOS will continue its
work. In 2002 José Luis Alvarez will even be the main responsible for the EGOS meeting in
Barcelona 4-7 July, 2002. At this meeting the Special Working Group created in relation to
the CEMP programme will host the sub-theme “Management Ideas and Organizational Poli-
tics”. The track, which will be convened by Lars Engwall and Matthias Kipping, has attracted
42 submissions, of which less than fifty per cent can be accepted.
As already mentioned above in Section 5.4 a number of publications are likely to
come out of the programme after it has officially finished. In addition, as described in Section
4.2, the CEMP group plans further research.
89

6. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS AND REFERENCES
6.1. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Members of the CEMP group likes to express their sincere thanks to the European Union for
the funding of the programme. In Brussels the group particularly wants to thank Mr. Ronan
O'Brien for a very constructive co-operation. Our thanks also go to all the persons who have
been involved in the programme in one way or another. The contributions of scholars to the
workshops, seminars and conferences have been very crucial for the development of the pro-
gramme. The same is true for all the support we have received from a number of persons who
have worked behind the scenes to organise these events. Finally, our thanks of course go to
our home institutions for their support.
6.2. REFERENCES
Aldrick, P., 1998, “Staying at Home”, Management Consultant International, October.
Alvarez, J. L. and C. Mazza, 2000, The Consumption of Management Publications, CEMP
Report No. 10, March.
Alvarez, J. L., 2000, ”Theories of Managerial Action and their Impact on the Conceptualization
of Executive Careers”, in M. Peiperl and M. Arthur (eds.), Career Frontiers: New Conceptions
of Working Lives, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 127-137.
Alvarez, J. L., C. Mazza and J. Mur, 1999, The Management Publishing Industry in Europe,
CEMP Report No. 5, June.
Alvarez, J. L., 1997, (ed.), The Diffusion and Consumption of Business Knowledge, London:
Macmillan.
Alvesson, M., 1999, “Methodology for Close up Studies – Struggling with Closeness and
Closure”, Working Paper, Institute of Economic Research, No. 1999/4, School of Economics,
Lund University.
Amdam, R. P. and R. Kvålshaugen, 1999, Management Education in Europe – A Literature
Review, CEMP Report No. 4, September 1998.
Amdam, R. P., 1999. Utdanning, økonomi og ledelse: Utviklingen av den økonomiskadministrative
utdanningen 1936-1985, Oslo: Unipub.
Amdam, R. P., 2001, “Business Schools between Academia and the Service Industry:
Changes in European Business Education in the 20th Century”, Paper to the Business History
Conference, Miami, April 2001
Amdam, R. P., 2002, “Hvordan oppfatter norske ledere moderne ledelse?”, (forthcoming).
Amdam, R. P., R. Kvålshaugen and E. Larsen (eds.), 2002, Inside the Business Schools: Management
Education in Europe, Oslo: Abstrakt Press (forthcoming).
Amdam R. P., E. Larsen and R. Kvålshaugen, 2000, The Content of Management Education
in Europe, CEMP Report No. 12, September.
Amorim, C. 2001, “Surveys of Management Innovations in Europe: Spain and Portugal” and
90

“TQM in Spain and Portugal”, in Kipping, M., 2001, Consultancies and the Creation of
European Management Practice, CEMP Report No. 16, July, pp. 47-69 and 144-168.
Argyris, C., 1990, Overcoming Organizational Defences: Transforming Organizational
Learning, Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Arnoldus, D., 2000, “The Role of Consultancies in the Transformation of the Dutch Banking
Sector, 1950s to 1990s”, Entreprises et Histoire, 25, October, pp. 65-81.
Arnoldus D. and Dankers J., 2001, “Management Consultancies in the Dutch Banking Sector,
1950s to 1990s”, Paper presented at the 17th EGOS Colloquium, Lyon, 5-7 July 2001, Subtheme
29: The Travel of Ideas.
Barley, S. R. and G. Kunda, 1992, “Design and Devotion: Surges of Rational and Normative
Ideologies of Control in Managerial Discourse”, Administrative Science Quarterly, 37, September,
pp. 363-399.
Bartlett, C. A. 1998, “McKinsey & Company: Managing Knowledge and Learning”, Boston,
MA: Harvard Business School Case Study (Revised version, first version 1997).
Baumard, P., 1999, Tacit Knowledge in Organizations, London: Sage.
Beatty, J., 1998, The World According to Peter Drucker, New York: Free Press.
Bedeian, A. G. and D. A. Wren, 2001, “Most Influential Management Books of the 20 th Century”,
Organizational Dynamics, 29, No. 3, pp. 221-225.
Bourdieu, P., 1989, La Noblesse d’état, Paris: Minuit.
Boutaiba, S. and J. Strandgaard Pedersen, 2002, “Creating MBA Identity: Between Field and
Organization”, in R. P. Amdam, R. Kvålshaugen and E. Larsen (eds.) Inside the Business
Schools: Management Education in Europe, Oslo: Abstrakt Press (forthcoming).
Byrkjeflot, H., 1999a, The Structure of Management Education in Europe, CEMP Report No.
8, November.
Byrkjeflot, H., 1999b, Modernisering og ledelse – om samfunnsmessige betingelser for demokratisk
lederskap, Doctoral dissertation, University of Bergen.
Byrkjeflot, H., 1999c, “Ledelsesutfordringer ved årtusenskiftet”, Magma, 5, pp. 35-46.
Byrkjeflot, H., 2001, “Management Education and Selection of Top Managers in Europe and
the United States”, LOS Report R0103.
Carlson, S., 1951, Executive Behaviour: A Study of the Workload and Working Methods of
Managing Directors, Stockholm: Strömbergs.
Castells, M., 2000, The Rise of the Networks Society, Oxford: Blackwell (Second Edition).
Chandler, A., 1962, Strategy and Structure. Chapters in the History of the American Industrial
Enterprise, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Chandler, A., 1977, The Visible Hand. The Managerial Revolution in American Business,
Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Chandler, A., 1990, Scale and Scope. The Dynamics of Industrial Capitalism, Cambridge,
MA, The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Chandler, A., F. Amatori and T. Hikino (eds.), 1997, Big Business and the Wealth of Nations,
New York: Cambridge University Press.
Channon, D., 1973, The Strategy and Structure of British Enterprise, London, Macmillan.
91

Chisholm, R. F. 1998: Developing Network Organizations: Learning from Practice and Theory,
Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Clark, T., 1995, Managing Consultants. Consultancy as the Management of Impressions,
Buckingham: Open University Press.
Clark T. and Greatbatch D., 2002, “Collaborative Relationships in the Creation and Fashioning
of Management Ideas: Gurus, Editors and Managers”, in M. Kipping and L. Engwall,
(eds.), Management Consulting: Emergence and Dynamics of a Knowledge Industry, Oxford:
Oxford University Press (forthcoming).
Clark, T. and G. Salaman, 1998, “Creating the Right Impression: Towards a Dramaturgy of
Management Consultancy”, The Service Industries Journal, 18, January, pp. 18-38.
Covey, S., 1990, The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People, New York: Fireside Book.
Crucini, C. and M. Kipping, 2001, “Management Consultancies as Global Change Agents?
Evidence from Italy”, Journal of Organizational Change Management, 14, No. 5, pp. 570-
589.
Czarniawska, B. and B. Joerges, 1996, “Travels of Ideas”, in B. Czarniawska and G. Sevón
(eds.), Translating Organizational Change, Berlin: de Gruyter, pp 13-49.
DiMaggio, P. J. and W. W. Powell, 1983, “The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism
and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields”, American Sociology Review, 48,
No. 2, pp. 147-160.
Djelic, M.-L., 1998, Exporting the American Model, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Drucker, P. F., 1946, Concept of Corporation, London: John Day.
Drucker, P. F., 1998, Peter Drucker on the Profession of Management, Boston, MA: Harvard
Business School Press.
Drucker, P. F., 1999, Management Challenges for the 21st Century, New York: Harper.
Dyas, G. P. and H. T. Thanheiser, 1976, The Emerging European Enterprise. Strategy and
Structure in French and German Industry, London: Macmillan.
Engwall, L., 1998. “Mercury and Minerva: A Modern Multinational Academic Business Studies
on a Global Scale”, in J. L. Alvarez (ed.), The Diffusion and Consumption of Business
Knowledge, London: Macmillan, pp. 81-109.
Engwall, L., 1999, The Carriers of European Management Ideas, CEMP Report No. 7, December.
Engwall L. and V. Zagmani (eds.), 1998, Management Education in an Historical Perspective,
Manchester: Manchester University Press.
Engwall, L. and C. Eriksson, 2000, “Advising Corporate Superstars. CEOs and Consultancies
in Top Swedish Corporations”, Paper presented at the Academy of Management Meeting in
Toronto, August 2000.
Engwall, L. and C. Pahlberg, 2001a, The Content of European Management Ideas, CEMP
Report No. 11, March.
Engwall, L. and C. Pahlberg, 2001b, The Diffusion of European Management Ideas, CEMP
Report No. 17, October.
Eriksson, C., 2002, Identity: Consultant (forthcoming).
Ernst, B. and A. Kieser, 2002, “In Search of Explanations for the Consulting Explosion”, in
92

K. Sahlin-Andersson and L. Engwall (eds.), Carriers of Management Knowledge: Ideas and
their Circulation, Stanford: Stanford University Press (forthcoming).
Faust M., 2002, “Consultancies as Actors in Knowledge Arenas: Evidence from Germany”, in
M. Kipping and L. Engwall, (eds.), 2002, Management Consulting: Emergence and Dynamics
of a Knowledge Industry, Oxford: Oxford University Press (forthcoming).
Faust, M., 2000, ‘Warum boomt die Managementberatung? Und warum nicht zu allen Zeiten
und überall?’, SOFI-Mitteilungen, 28: 59-85 (forthcoming in R. Schmidt, H. Gergs and M.
Pohlmann (eds.), Managementsoziologie. Theorien, Forschungsperspektiven, Desiderate.
Munich: Hampp).
Flaherty, J. E., 1999, Peter Drucker: Shaping the Managerial Mind, San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass.
Francke, R. H., T. W. Edlund and F. Oster III, 1990, “The Development of Strategic Management.
Journal Quality and Article Impact”, Strategic Management Journal, 11, pp. 243-
253.
Fredrikson, J. W. (ed.), 1990, Perspectives on Strategic Management, New York: Harper
Business.
Gibbons M., et al, 1994, The New Production of Knowledge. The Dynamics of Science and
Research in Contemporary Societies, London: Sage.
Goleman, D., 1995, Emotional Intelligence, New York: Bantam Books.
Gross, C., 2000, “The Dissemination of Consultancy Knowledge”, in M. Kipping and T.
Armbrüster, The Content of Consultancy Work: Knowledge Generation, Codification and
Dissemination, CEMP Report No. 13, October, pp. 134-164.
Grönroos, K., 1990, Service Management and Marketing, Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
Guillén, M., 1994, Models of Management. Work, Authority, and Organization in a Comparative
Perspective, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Guillén, M., 2001, The Limits of Convergence, Princeton, NY: Princeton University Press.
Hammer, M. and J. Champy, 1993, Reengineering the Corporation, London: Nicholas Brealy.
Hedmo, T, 1998, “European MBA Accreditation”, Paper presented at the CEMP Workshop in
Lausanne, 20-21 November 1998.
Hedmo, T., 1999, “Professional Associations as Arenas for the Diffusion of Management
Ideas”, Paper presented at the EGOS Colloquium in Warwick, July 1999.
Hedmo, T., 2001, “The Europeanisation of Management Education”, Paper presented at the
16 th Scandinavian Academy of Management Meeting, Uppsala, Sweden, August 2001.
Hedmo, T., 2002, “The Europeanisation of Management Education”, in R. P. Amdam, R.
Kvålshaugen and E. Larsen (eds.) Inside the Business Schools: Management Education in
Europe, Oslo: Abstrakt Press (forthcoming).
Hofstede, G., 1980, Culture’s Consequences. International Differences in Work-Related Values,
London: Sage.
Huczynski, A. A., 1993, Management Gurus, What Makes Them and How to Become One,
London: Routledge
Håkansson, H. (ed.), 1982, International Marketing and Purchasing of Industrial Goods. An
Interaction Approach, Chichester: Wiley.
93

Jackall, R., 1988, Moral Mazes: The World of Corporate Managers, New York: Oxford University
Press.
Jones, T. M., 1995, “Instrumental Stakeholder Theory: A Synthesis of Ethics and Economics”,
Academy of Management Review, 20, No. 2, pp. 404-437.
Keeble, D. and J. Schwalbach, 1995, Management Consultancy in Europe, ESRC Centre for
Business Research, University of Cambridge, Working Paper No. 1, February.
Kieser, A., 1998, “Unternehmensberater – Händler in Problemen, Praktiken und Sinn”, in H.
Glaser, E. F. Schröder and A. v. Werder (eds.) Organisation im Wandel der Märkte, Wiesbaden:
Gabler, pp. 191-226.
Kipping, M., 1998, “The Hidden Business Schools: Management Training in Germany since
1945”, in L. Engwall and V. Zamagni (eds.), Management Education in an Historical Perspective,
Manchester: Manchester University Press, pp. 95-110.
Kipping, M., 1999, “American Management Consulting Companies in Western Europe, 1920
to 1990: Products, Reputation and Relationships”, Business History Review, 73, No. 2, pp.
199-220.
Kipping, M., 2001a, Consultancies and the Creation of European Management Practice,
CEMP Report No. 16, July.
Kipping, M., 2001b, “The Evolution of Management Consultancy: Its Origins and Global
Development”, in B. Curnow and J. Reuvid (eds.), The International Guide to Management
Consultancy, London: Kogan, pp. 20-32.
Kipping, M., 2002, “Trapped in Their Wave: The Evolution of Management Consultancies”,
in Clark, T. and R. Fincham (eds.), Critical Consulting, Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 28-49.
Kipping, M., 2003, The Consultancy Business: Historical and Comparative Perspectives,
Oxford: Oxford University Press (forthcoming).
Kipping, M. and C. Amorim, 2002, “Consultancies as Management Schools”, in Amdam, R.
P., R. Kvålshaugen and E. Larsen (eds.), 2002, Inside the Business Schools: Management
Education in Europe, Oslo: Abstrakt Press (forthcoming).
Kipping, M. and T. Armbrüster, 1998, Management Consultants and Management Knowledge:
A Literature Review, CEMP Report No. 2, December.
Kipping, M. and T. Armbrüster, 1999, The Consultancy Field in Western Europe, CEMP Report
No. 6, June.
Kipping, M. and T. Armbrüster, 2000, The Content of Consultancy Work: Knowledge Generation,
Codification and Dissemination, CEMP Report No. 13, October.
Kipping, M. and O. Bjarnar (eds.), 1998, The Americanisation of European Business, London:
Routledge.
Kipping, M. and L. Engwall, (eds.), 2002, Management Consulting: Emergence and Dynamics
of a Knowledge Industry, Oxford: Oxford University Press (forthcoming).
Kipping, M., S. Furusten, S. and H. Gammelsæter, 1998/1999, “Converging towards American
Dominance? Developments and Structures of the Consultancy Field in Western Europe”.
Discussion Papers in Economics and Management, The University of Reading, Series A, Vol.
XI, No 398.
Kipping, M. and A. Scheybani, 1994, “From Scope to Scale: Tendances récentes du marché
allemand du conseil en management”, Revue de l’IRES, 14, pp. 173-99.
94

Kogut, B. and D. Parkinson, 1993, “The Diffusion of American Organizing Principles to
Europe”, in B. Kogut (ed.), Country Competitiveness, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp.
179-202.
Kvålshaugen, R., 2001a, The Role of Educational Background in Diffusion of Management
Knowledge, CEMP Report No. 14, July.
Kvålshaugen, R., 2001b, The Antecedents of Management Competence. The Role of Educational
Background and Type of Work Experience, Doctoral dissertation, Norwegian School of
Management, BI, Oslo, Norway.
Latour, B., 1986, Science in Action, Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
Lindvall, J., 1998, The Creation of Management Practice: A Literature Review, CEMP Report
No. 1, September.
Lindvall, J. and C. Pahlberg, 1998, Multinationals as Carriers of Management Practice,
CEMP Report No. 3, December.
Lindvall, J. and C. Pahlberg, 1999, “SAP/R3 as Carrier of Management Knowledge”, Paper
presented at the SCANCOR workshop 16-17 September.
Lipnack, J. and J. Stamps, 1994, The Age of the Network: Organizing Principles for the 21st
Century, New York: Wiley.
Locke, R. R., 1984, The End of the Practical Man: Entrepreneurship and Higher Education
in Germany, France, and Great Britain, 1880-1940, Greenwich, CT: JAI Press
Lorange, P., 1996. “Between Academia and Business: New Challenges for Today’s Modern
Business Schools”, in R. P. Amdam (ed.), Management Education and Competitiveness:
Europe, Japan and the United States, London and New York: Routledge, pp. 246-258.
Maurice, M., F. Sellier and J.-J. Silvestre, 1986, The Social Foundations of Industrial Power,
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Mazza, C., 1997, “The Popularization of Business Knowledge Diffusion: From Academic
Knowledge to Popular Culture? ”, in J. L. Alvarez (ed.), The Production and Consumption of
Business Knowledge in Europe, London: Macmillan, pp. 164-181.
Mazza, C. and J. L. Alvarez, 2000, “Haute Couture or Prêt-à-Porter: Creating and Diffusing
Management Practices Through the Popular Press”, Organization Studies, 21, No. 3, pp. 567-
588.
Mazza, C. and J. L. Alvarez, 2001, The Next Step: Media Influences on Knowledge-in-
Practice, CEMP Report No. 15, July.
McKenna, C. D., 1995, “The Origins of Modern Management Consulting”, Business and
Economic History, 25, No. 1, pp. 51-58.
Meister, J. C., 1998, Corporate Universities: Lessons in Building a World-Class Work Force,
New York: McGraw-Hill.
Merkle, J. A., 1980, Management and Ideology. The Legacy of the International Scientific
Management Movement, Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Meyer, H.-D., 1998, ”The German Handelshochschulen 1898-1933”, in L. Engwall and V.
Zamagni (eds.), Management Education in an Historical Perspective, Manchester: Manchester
University Press, pp. 19-33.
Meyer, J., 2000, “Globalization and the Expansion and Standardization of Management”, in
95

K. Sahlin-Andersson and L. Engwall (eds.), Carriers of Management Knowledge: Ideas and
their Circulation, Stanford: Stanford University Press (forthcoming).
Meyer, J. and B. Rowan, 1977, “Institutionalized Organizations: Formal Structure as Myth
and Ceremony”, American Journal of Sociology, 12, No. 2, pp. 340-363.
Mintzberg, H., 1996, “Musings on Management”, Harvard Business Review, 74, July-August,
pp. 61-67.
Mitchell, V-W., 1994, “Problems and Risks in the Purchasing of Consultancy Services”, The
Service Industries Journal, 14, pp. 315-339.
Nohria, N. and S. Ghoshal, 1997, The Differentiated Network, New York: The Free Press.
Nonaka, I. and H. Takeuchi, 1995, The Knowledge-Creating Company, New York: Oxford
University Press.
Nowotny, H., P. Scott and M. Gibbons, 2001, Re-Thinking Science. Knowledge and the Public
in an Age of Uncertainty, Cambridge: Polity Press.
Penrose, E. T., 1959, The Theory of the Growth of the Firm, Oxford: Basil & Blackwell.
Peters, T. J. and R. H. Waterman, 1982, In Search of Excellence: Lessons from American
Best-Run Companies, New York: Harper & Row.
Piaget, J., 1969, The Mechanisms of Perception, London: Routledge & Paul Kegan.
Porter, L. W. And L. E. McKibbin, 1988, Management Education and Development. Drift of
Thrust into the 21st Century?, New York: McGraw-Hill.
Porter, M. E., 1980, Competitive Strategy, New York: Free Press.
Powell, W. W. and P. J. DiMaggio (eds.), 1991, The New Institutionalism in Organizational
Analysis, Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press.
Puig, N., 2002, “Educating Spanish Managers: The United States, Modernizing Networks,
and Business Schools in Spain, 1950-1975”, in R. P. Amdam, R. Kvålshaugen and E. Larsen
(eds.), Inside the Business Schools: Management Education in Europe, Oslo: Abstrakt Press
(forthcoming).
Putnam, R. D., R. Leonardi and R. Y. Nanetti, 1993, Making Democracy Work. Civic Traditions
in Modern Italy, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Roe, M. J., 1994, Strong Managers. Weak Owners, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Sahlin-Andersson, K., 1996, “Imitating by Editing Success. The Construction of Organizational
Fields”, in Czarniawska, B. and G. Sevón (eds.), 1996, Translating Organizational
Change, Berlin: de Gruyter, pp. 69-92.
Sauviat, C., 1994, “Le conseil: un marché-réseau singulier”, in J. de Brandt and J. Gadrey
(eds.), Relations de service, marchés de service, Paris: CNRS Editions, pp. 241-262.
Schmitz, C. J., 1997, The Growth of Big Business in the United States and Western Europe,
1850-1939, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Scott, W. R., 1995, Institutions and Organizations, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Senge, P., 1990, Fifth Discipline, New York: Doubleday.
Shenhav, Y. 1999, Manufacturing Rationality: The Engineering Foundations of the Managerial
Revolution, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sloan, A. P., 1965, My Years with General Motors, London Sidgwick & Jackson.
96

Strambach S., 2001, “Surveys of Management Innovations in Europe: Germany and Britain”,
in M. Kipping, Consultancies and the Creation of European Management Practice, CEMP
Report No. 16, July, pp. 28-46.
Svejenova, S. and J. L. Alvarez, 1999, Contents and Influence of Management Academic Outlets,
CEMP Report No. 9, September 1999.
Takagi, J and L. de Carlo, 2002, “The Ephemeral National Model of Management Education:
A Comparative Study of Five Management Programs in France”, in R. P. Amdam, R. Kvålshaugen
and E. Larsen (eds.) Inside the Business Schools: Management Education in Europe,
Oslo: Abstrakt Press (forthcoming).
Wallerstein, I., 1999, The End of the World as We Know It: Social Science for the Twenty-first
Century, Minneapolis, MI: University of Minnesota Press.
Wedlin, L. 2000, “Business School Rankings and the Diffusion of Ideas”, Paper presented at
the 16 th EGOS Colloquium in Helsinki, 2-4 July.
Whitley, R. (ed.), 1992, European Business Systems: Firms and Markets in their National
Contexts, London: Sage.
Whitley, R., 1999, Divergent Capitalisms. The Social Structuring and Change of Business
Systems, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Whitley, R. and P. Hull Kristensen, (eds.), 1996, The Changing European Firm. Limits to
Convergence, London: Routledge.
Whitley, R. and P. Hull Kristensen, (eds.), 1997, Governance at Work: The Social Regulation
of Economic Relations, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Whittington, R. and M. Mayer, 2000, The European Corporation. Strategy, Structure and
Social Science, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Whittington, R. and M. Mayer, 2001, “Mapping the Corporation: Strategy, Structure and Social
Science in Europe, 1950s-1960s”, Paper presented at the CEMP Workshop on The Implementation
of Management Ideas in European Companies, Molde, 4-6 May 2001.
Williams, G., 1984, “The Economic Approach”, in B. R. Clark (ed.), Perspectives on Higher
Education: Eight Disciplinary and Comparative Views, Berkeley, CA: University of California
Press, pp. 79-105.
Zysman, J., 1983, Governments, Markets and Growth: Financial Systems and Politics of Industrial
Change, Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
7. ANNEXES
7.1. CONFERENCES AND WORKSHOPS ARRANGED WITHIN THE PROGRAMME
1998
9-11 July Conference track at the 14 th EGOS Colloquium in Maastricht: “The Creation
and Diffusion of Management Practice”.
20-21 November Workshop at IMD, Lausanne: “Management Education and Management
Practice in Europe”.
1999
97

23-25 April Co-ordination and integration meeting in Oslo.
4-6 July Conference track at the 15 th EGOS Colloquium in Warwick: “Knowledge
of Management: Production, Training and Diffusion”.
19-21 August Conference track at the 15 th Nordic Conference on Business Studies in
Helsinki: “Diffusion of Modern Management Ideas”.
16-17 September Workshop at SCANCOR, Stanford: “Carriers of Management Knowledge”.
15-16 October Workshop in Reading: “Management Consultants and Management
Knowledge”.
2000
4-6 May Workshop in Paris: “The Content of Management Education”.
19-20 May Conference in Reading: “External Experts in Organisations”.
20 June Round-table in Toulouse: “Consultant-Client Relationships”.
25 June-1 July Summer School outside Helsinki: “The Diffusion of Modern Management
Ideas”.
2-4 July Conference track at the 16 th EGOS Colloquium in Helsinki: “The Impact
of Managerial Knowledge on the Convergence of European Management
Practice”.
17-18 November Workshop at the European Institute for Advanced Studies in Management
in Brussels: “The Management Advice Industry”.
1-3 December Workshop in Barcelona: “The Role of Media in the Diffusion of European
Management Practices”.
2001
4-6 May Workshop in Molde: “The Implementation of Management Ideas in
European Companies”.
5-7 July Conference track at the 17 th EGOS Colloquium in Lyon: “The Travel of
Ideas”.
7.2. EXECUTIVE MEETINGS
1998
6-8 March Barcelona
8 July Maastricht
21 November Lausanne
98

1999
25 April Oslo
6 July Warwick
17 October Reading
2000
12 February Barcelona
7 April Barcelona
7 May Paris
27 June Helsinki
30 November Barcelona
2001
6 May Molde
2-4 November Uppsala
15-17 December Paris
7.3. CONFERENCE PRESENTATIONS BY CEMP RESEARCHERS
1998
24 February Presentation of CEMP to a seminar of doctoral students at the Norwegian
School of Management (Lars Engwall).
19-21 March Presentation of the paper “The Americanisation of Management” at the
Brown-Bologna conference in Forlì, Italy (Lars Engwall).
21 April Presentation of CEMP to doctoral students at the Copenhagen Business
School (Lars Engwall).
18 May Presentation of CEMP to the Doctoral Colloquium at the 27 th Conference
of the European Academy of Marketing in Stockholm (Lars Engwall).
10 July Presentation of the papers “Educational Background and the Formation
of Management Perspectives” (Ragnhild Kvålshaugen, Rolv Petter Amdam,
Eirinn Larsen and Haldor Byrkjeflot), ”MBA: European Constructions
of an American Model” (Carmelo Mazza, Kerstin Sahlin-Andersson
and Jesper Strandgaard Pedersen), “Converging Towards American
Dominance? Developments and Structures of the Consultancy Fields in
99

Western Europe” (Matthias Kipping, Staffan Furusten and Hallgeir
Gammelsæter) and “Does the North American Dominance in Business
Studies Prevail?” (Rickard Danell) at the sub-theme “The Creation and
Diffusion of Management Practices” at the 14 th EGOS Colloquium in
Maastricht.
24-26 September Session on management education organised at the European Business
History Association’s Conference in Terni, Italy (Rolv Petter Amdam).
18 October Presentation of the paper “The Globalisation of Management” at the conference
“The Management of Globalisation” in Krems, Austria (Lars
Engwall).
20 November Presentation of the papers “The Standardisation of Management” (Lars
Engwall), “Management Systems in Europe and the USA” (Haldor Byrkjeflot),
“MBA: European Constructions of an American Model” (Carmelo
Mazza, Kerstin Sahlin-Andersson and Jesper Strandgaard Pedersen)
and “On Education and Management Competence – from the Managers’
Perspective (Ragnhild Kvålshaugen) at the CEMP workshop “Management
Education and Management Practice in Europe” at IMD in
Lausanne.
21 November Presentation of the papers “Women and Management – An Issue within
European Management Education” (Eirinn Larsen) and “European MBA
Accreditation” (Tina Hedmo) at the CEMP workshop “Management
Education and Management Practice in Europe” at IMD in Lausanne.
27-28 November Presentation of the paper “The Role of Consultancies in France” and on
the CEMP project at a conference on “Gestion et Décision” at the University
of Toulouse (Matthias Kipping).
1999
27 January Presentation of CEMP to doctoral students at the Copenhagen School of
Business (Lars Engwall).
20 February Conference on consultants at the King’s College, London (presentations
by Lars Engwall, Matthias Kipping, Staffan Furusten and Hallgeir Gammelsæter).
5-7 March Presentation of the papers on “The Development and Professionalisation
of Management Consultancies in Italy after WW II” (Cristina Crucini)
and “The Selling of Consultancy Services: The Portuguese Case in Historical
and Comparative Perspective” (Celeste Amorim and Matthias
Kipping) at the Annual Meeting of the Business History Conference at
Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
11 March Presentation of “Carriers of Management Knowledge in Historical Perspective”
at the University of Grenoble (Matthias Kipping).
100

19 March Presentation on consultancies as a channel for the diffusion of work study
at a workshop on the productivity movements in Britain and Japan at the
London School of Economics (Matthias Kipping).
20 March Presentation of the CEMP project as an example for the collaboration
between business historians and management scholars at a workshop on
Business History at the Oxford Business School (Matthias Kipping).
March-May Teaching at the course on “The Diffusion of Management Ideas” at Copenhagen
Business School, MA in Economics (Jesper Strandgaard and
Peter Kjær).
28-29 May Key note speech on “The Creation of European Management Practice:
Nordic Business Education” at a workshop on International Business
History, Aarhus (Rolv Petter Amdam).
5 June Presentation of the paper “Managerial Capitalism Revisited” at the 1 st
Humboldt-Forum on Economics and Management on “Corporate Governance”,
Humboldt-University, Berlin (Lars Engwall).
9 June Presentation of the paper “Europa et Taurus. European Management
Made in USA” at the Conference “Economic Integration in Europe: the
Status of Swedish Research”, Mölle, Sweden (Lars Engwall).
5 July Presentation of the papers “Advising Corporate Superstars” (Lars Engwall
and Carin Eriksson) and “Networks of Knowledge? Management
Consultancies, Business Schools and Professional Associations in Italy”
(Cristina Crucini) at the subgroup “Knowledge of Management: Production,
Training and Diffusion” at the 15 th EGOS Colloquium in Warwick.
2-8 August Seminar on Management Consultancies at a summer school of German
National Scholarship Foundation at Bradfield, UK (organised by Professor
Alfred Kieser and Matthias Kipping).
7 August Caucus on CEMP at the Critical Management Workshop at Academy of
Management Annual Meeting in Chicago (Lars Engwall, Matthias Kipping
and Thomas Armbrüster).
8 August Participation in a panel on the theme “Perspectives on the Knowledge
Industry” at the Academy of Management Annual Meeting in Chicago
(Lars Engwall).
10 August Presentation of the paper “Consultancies and Types of Knowledge” at the
Academy of Management Annual Meeting in Chicago (Thomas Armbrüster
and Matthias Kipping).
20 August Presentation of the papers “From Diffusion to Regulation: The Development
of MBA in Europe” (Kerstin Sahlin-Andersson, Carmelo Mazza
and Jesper Strandgaard Pedersen), “The Production of Management Culture:
The Case of Kenningism” (Ragnhild Kvålshaugen and Rolv Petter
Amdam) and “Hello Dolly! The European Cloning of US Management
Research” (Rickard Danell and Lars Engwall) at the session “Diffusion
101

of Modern Management Ideas” at the 15 th Nordic Conference on Business
Studies in Helsinki.
21 August Presentation of the paper “ Current Management Concepts and Their Use
in Multinationals”(Jan Lindvall and Cecilia Pahlberg) at the session “Diffusion
of Modern Management Ideas” at the 15 th Nordic Conference on
Business Studies in Helsinki.
9 September Presentation of the paper “Consultancies and the Standardisation of Management
Practice: the Case of the Bedaux System” at the Research Seminar
of the Hagley Museum and Library, Wilmington, DE (Matthias Kipping).
16 September Presentation of the papers “Knowledge Production in Action: Restructuring
the Press Field by the Diffusion of Business Knowledge and Discourse”
(Carmelo Mazza and Jesper Strandgaard-Pedersen), “Engineering
a Link between Vocational Schools and Universities? The Divergent
Role of Professional Associations and Business Interests in the Formation
of Systems for Technical Education in Germany and the USA” (Haldor
Byrkjeflot) and “Towards Homogenisation of European Management
Education? The Scandinavian Case” (Rolv Petter Amdam) at the workshop
“Carriers of Management Knowledge” at SCANCOR, Stanford,
CA.
17 September Presentation of the papers “Organizational Change through the Transfer
of Knowledge: Pitfalls in the Use of Management Consultants” (Thomas
Armbrüster and Matthias Kipping), “Management Concepts as Haute
Couture” (Carin Eriksson and Jan Lindvall) and “SAP R/3 as Carrier of
Management Knowledge” (Jan Lindvall and Cecilia Pahlberg) at the
workshop “Carriers of Management Knowledge” at SCANCOR, Stanford,
CA.
4-6 October Presentation of the paper “The Future of the Consulting Industry in the
Knowledge Economy” at the Annual Meeting of the Strategic Management
Society in Berlin (Matthias Kipping and Thomas Armbrüster).
15 October Presentation of the papers “Bridge over Troubled Water. Professors in
Management Consulting” (Lars Engwall, Staffan Furusten and Eva
Wallerstedt) and ”Quo Vadis Consulting? The Changes on the Consulting
Market in a Knowledge-based Framework” (Matthias Kipping and
Thomas Armbrüster) at the workshop “Management Consultants and
Management Knowledge” in Reading.
22-24 October Presentation of the paper “Farewell to the Rational, Invisible Hand. Management
Models in Scandinavia” at the conference “Management in
Scandinavia”, Oslo (Lars Engwall).
15-16 November Presentations of the CEMP-programme and CEMP papers at a research
seminar at the LOS Centre, Bergen, Norway (Lars Engwall, Haldor
Byrkjeflot, Matthias Kipping and Ragnhild Kvålshaugen).
102

15-17 November Presentation of the paper “Towards Homogenisation of European Management
Education?” at the Asian Forum on Business Education, Hong
Kong (Rolv Petter Amdam).
2000
Development of a MSc in International Consultancy and Accounting
which has been running in Reading from the academic year 2000/01
(Matthias Kipping).
17 February Presentation of research on the consultancy theme and the CEMP project
as a whole at a research workshop at the École Supérieure Universitaire
de Gestion, University of Toulouse (Matthias Kipping).
9 March Presentation of “Mastering Minerva Multinationals, National Educational
Policies and Globalisation” at the 5 th Peder Sæther Symposium at Berkeley,
CA (Lars Engwall).
10-12 March Presentation of “The Anglo-American Contribution to the Dissemination
of Stakeholder Capitalism in Germany after 1945” at the Annual Meeting
of the Business History Conference in Palo Alto, CA (Matthias Kipping).
23-25 March Presentation of “From Public to Private: Efforts to Improve Economic
Efficiency in Germany, 1920s to 1990s” at the Third Japanese-German
Business History Conference, University of Tokyo (Matthias Kipping).
6 April Presentation of CEMP research results at the Stockholm Centre for Organization
Research (Lars Engwall).
27 April Key note speech presenting the report “The Carriers of European Management
Practice” at the 8 th Nordic Conference on Leadership and
Organisation in Växjö, Sweden, (Lars Engwall).
4 May Presentation of the papers “Perspectives on the Content of Management
Education in Europe” (Rolv Petter Amdam, Ragnhild Kvålshaugen and
Eirinn Larsen) and “On the Construction of Content in Business Education”
(Agnete Vabø, Eirinn Larsen and Ragnhild Kvålshaugen) at the
workshop on “The Content of Management Education” in Paris.
5 May Presentation of the papers “From Business Economics to Business Administration?
A Discussion of Structure, Content and Networks in European
Business Education” (Haldor Byrkjeflot), “Do Management Education
and Training Really Matter? A Comparison of Germany, Britain and
France” (Matthias Kipping) and “The Content of European Business
Education – Towards Convergence or Still National Specific?” (Eirinn
Larsen) at the workshop on “The Content of Management Education” in
Paris.
8 May Presentation of CEMP research results at the Department of Economic
History, Uppsala University (Lars Engwall).
103

25 May Presentation of “Learning in the Iron Cage”, at a conference on Knowledge
and Innovation, Helsinki School of Economics and Business Administration,
(Lars Engwall).
15-17 June Key note speech presenting CEMP results at the AIDEA workshop
“Managerial Knowledge between Globalization and Local Contexts” at
LUISS University in Rome (Lars Engwall).
15-17 June Presentation of the papers “The Role of Small Consultancies in Global-
Knowledge Economies: Evidence from Italy” (Cristina Crucini and Matthias
Kipping) and “University Decadence: How to Destroy (and Rebuild?)
the Ivory Tower” at the AIDEA workshop “Managerial Knowledge
between Globalization and Local Contexts” at LUISS University in
Rome (Carmelo Mazza and Paolo Quattrone).
2 July Presentation of the papers “The End of Business Schools?” (Haldor
Byrkjeflot) and “Diffusion of Managerial Knowledge: Are Managers’
Problem Solving Strategies Influenced by Educational Background”
(Ragnhild Kvålshaugen) at the subgroup “The Impact of Managerial
Knowledge on the Convergence of European Management Practices” at
the 16 th EGOS Colloquium in Helsinki.
3 July Presentation of the paper “Weaving the European Management Fabric:
The Academic Journals’ Influence” (Carmelo Mazza and Silviya Svejenova)
at the subgroup “The Impact of Managerial Knowledge on the
Convergence of European Management Practices” at the 16 th EGOS Colloquium
in Helsinki.
4 July Presentation of the paper “Quality Movement: The Institutionalisation of
Practice” (Celeste Amorim) at the subgroup “The Impact of Managerial
Knowledge on the Convergence of European Management Practices” at
the 16 th EGOS Colloquium in Helsinki.
12 July Presentation of the paper “International Supplier-buyer Relationships and
the Diffusion of Popular Management Practices” at a seminar at the University
of Braga in Portugal (Celeste Amorim).
7 August Presentation of the paper “Corporate Superstars and Consultancies” at the
Academy of Management Annual Meeting in Toronto, Canada (Lars
Engwall).
8 August Presentation at the symposium “Global Monoculture or Multiculture?
Will the Next Century Bring Standards or Variations in Organizational
Practice” at the Academy of Management Annual Meeting in Toronto,
Canada (Lars Engwall).
16 September Presentation of the paper “The Introduction of the M-form in the Scandinavian
Countries”, at the European Business History Association Conference,
Bordeaux (Rolv Petter Amdam and Hallgeir Gammelsæter).
104

October-November Course on the theme “The Production and Diffusion of Business Knowledge”,
Copenhagen Business School, MA in Economics (Carmelo Mazza
and Jesper Strandgaard).
5 October Presentation of “Globalization and Regional Management” in Trondheim,
Norway at the symposium “Regionalization between Nation State
and Globalization” arranged by the Royal Norwegian Society of Sciences
and Letters and the Royal Academy of Arts and Sciences of Uppsala
(Lars Engwall).
11 October Presentation of “Markets for Management Modernities” at Swedish Collegium
for Advanced Studies in the Social Science, Uppsala at the workshop
“Markets and Modernities – Zones of Interplay in the Social Sciences”
(Lars Engwall).
19-20 October Presentation of the paper “Dall’organizzazione del sapere al sapere organizzato?
Il sistema universitario italiano alla prova del mercato” at the
workshop “La pubblica amministrazione tra riforma e mutamento culturale”
at Università degli Studi La Sapienza, Faculty of Sociology, in
Rome (Carmelo Mazza and Paolo Quattrone).
20 October Presentation of the paper “Globalization and Regional Learning Systems:
Experiences from Norwegian Regions” at the University of Massachusetts
Lowell Committee on Industrial Theory and Assessment International
Conference on Approaches to Sustainable Regional Development:
The Role of the University in a Globalizing Economy (Rolv Petter Amdam
and Ove Bjarnar).
1-3 December Presentation of the papers “The Dissemination of Consultancy Publications”
(Claudia Gross), “The Emergence of a European Regulatory Field
of Management Education” (Tina Hedmo, Kerstin Sahlin-Andersson and
Linda Wedlin), “The Role of Media in Alliances for E-Learning” (Haldor
Byrkjeflot) and “Good Readings make Good Action: Nothing so Practical
as a Prestigious Story” (Carmelo Mazza and Jesper Strandgaard) at
the workshop “The Role of Media in the Consumption of Management
Ideas” at IESE in Barcelona.
10-13 December Presentation of the paper “Global Consultancies: the Determinants of
Market Entry Strategies for Conquering Clients in Foreign Locations” at
the Annual Meeting of the European International Business Academy in
Maastricht (Celeste Amorim).
14-16 December Presentation of a comparison between the development and role of consultancies
in Europe and Japan at an international conference organised
by the Asia-Pacific Researchers in Organization Studies (APROS), Sydney
(Matthias Kipping).
2001
7 March Lecture on CEMP for freshmen in the undergraduate programme in business
at Uppsala University (Lars Engwall).
105

28 March Presentation of the paper “Sceptical Eagerness: From Management
Knowledge to Action” at the Copenhagen Business School, Department
of Organisation and Work Sociology (Carmelo Mazza).
6 April Presentation of CEMP results at the International Institute of Business,
Stockholm (Lars Engwall).
20 April Presentation of the papers “The American Challenge Revisited” and
“Business History and its Contribution to Management Studies” at the
Inaugural Conference of the European Academy of Management, Barcelona,
Spain (Lars Engwall and Matthias Kipping).
21 April Presentation of the paper “Business Schools between Academia and the
Service Industry: Changes in European Business Education in the 20 th
Century” at the Business History Conference, USA (Rolv Petter Amdam).
4 May Presentation of the paper “The Modelling of Change: Context and the
Implementation of the M-form” (Rolv Petter Amdam and Hallgeir Gammelsæter)
at the CEMP workshop “The Implementation of Management
Ideas in European Companies” in Molde.
5 May Presentation of the paper “Management Innovations in Practice” (Celeste
Amorim) at the CEMP workshop “The Implementation of Management
Ideas in European Companies” in Molde.
16 August Presentation of the paper “The Europeanisation of Management Education”
at the 16 th Nordic Conference on Business Studies in Uppsala (Tina
Hedmo).
31 August Presentation of the paper “George Kenning – An American Management
Consultant in Norway, from the 1950s to the 1990s”, at the European
Business History Association Conference, Oslo (Rolv Petter Amdam).
7 September Presentation of the paper “The Context of European Management Education”
at the 10 th Anniversary of the European Doctoral Programmes Association
in Management and Business Administration (EDAMBA) in
Copenhagen (Lars Engwall).
21 September Presentation of the paper “The Diffusion of American Organisational
Models to Norwegian Industries 1945-1970”, at the Conference “Americanisation,
Cultural Transfer in the Economic Sphere in the Twentieth
Century”, Roubaix, France (Rolv Petter Amdam and Knut Sogner).
10 October Lecture on CEMP for freshmen in the undergraduate programme in business
at Uppsala University (Lars Engwall).
24 October Seminar on CEMP research results at Karlstad University (Lars Engwall).
25 October Presentation of the paper “Gourmet Food for Fast-food Managers” at the
Business Science Department, University of Bologna (Carmelo Mazza).
106

7.4. DISSEMINATION TO PRACTITIONERS
1999
15 February Conference on accreditation in Stockholm (Lars Engwall, chair and Tina
Hedmo, presentation).
29 September Presentation on accreditation at a seminar on the globalisation of higher
education arranged by the Swedish Minister of Education (Lars Engwall).
18 October Introduction and chair at the conference “The Future Strategy for Cooperation
between Business and Academia”, Södertörn University College,
Stockholm (Lars Engwall).
2000
30 March The CEMP Project presented in the Swedish daily newspaper Svenska
Dagbladet.
26 April Presentation of the CEMP Programme to managers and middle-managers
at Den Norske Bank, Oslo (Rolv Petter Amdam).
20 June Workshop on “Consultants in the European Aerospace Industry” and
round table discussion between consultants, company managers and academics
on the relationship between consultants and their clients, Toulouse
(Matthias Kipping).
22 September Presentation of the CEMP Programme to faculty members of the Fudan
University, Shanghai.
25 October Presentation of “The Diffusion of Principles of Management and Organization.
The Interaction of Academic Institutions with Consultants, Media
and Companies” for the Area Group on the Knowledge Society within
the Bank of Sweden Tercentenary Foundation (Lars Engwall).
3 November Presentation of research on consultancies at a meeting in Milan attended
by 350 Italian consultants (Matthias Kipping and Cristina Crucini).
17 November Presentation of work on consultancy web-sites at a workshop on management
consulting at the Stockholm School of Economics attended by
about 100 representatives from research, education and practice (Jonas
Bäcklund and Andreas Werr).
1 December Panel with practitioners on the theme “Publishers as Decision Makers” at
the workshop “The Role of Media in the Diffusion of European Management
Practices” in Barcelona (co-ordinator José Luis Alvarez).
2001
107

24 January Presentation of CEMP results for the Sub-Committee on Education and
Research of the Swedish Parliament (Lars Engwall).
5 April Presentation on “Looking Beyond Growth: Continuity and Change in
Management Consulting” to practitioners and academics at a meeting of
the German Society for Business History in Frankfurt (Matthias Kipping).
3 May Seminar for practitioners on the topic “Consulting Markets in Transition”,
Molde, Norway (Lars Engwall, Hallgeir Gammelsæter and Matthias
Kipping).
7 October Interview given to Spain’s largest newspaper, El Pais, on the use of the
business concept of network to other activities, such as politics, entertainment,
terrorism etc. (José Luis Alvarez).
8 November Presentation of the CEMP Program to the alumni meeting at the Norwegian
School of management – BI (Rolv Petter Amdam).
20 November Presentation on “The Dynamics of the Consultancy Business in a longterm
Perspective” to the consultancy working group of the Chamber of
Commerce in Frankfurt (Matthias Kipping).
7.5. DELIVERABLES
Report 1 “The Creation of Management Practice: A Literature Review”, Jan Lindvall,
September 1998.
Report 2 “Management Consultants and Management Knowledge: A Literature
Review”, Matthias Kipping and Thomas Armbrüster, December 1998.
Report 3 “Multinationals as Carriers of Management Practice”, Jan Lindvall and
Cecilia Pahlberg, December 1998.
Report 4 “Management Education: A Literature Review”, Rolv Petter Amdam and
Ragnhild Kvålshaugen, March 1999.
Report 5 “The Management Publishing Industry in Europe”, José Luis Alvarez
and Carmelo Mazza in collaboration with Jurdi Mur, June 1999.
Report 6 “The Consultancy Field in Western Europe”, Matthias Kipping and
Thomas Armbrüster, June 1999.
Report 7 “The Carriers of European Management Ideas”, Lars Engwall, December
1999.
Report 8 “The Structure of Management Education in Europe”, Haldor Byrkjeflot,
November 1999.
Report 9 “Contents and Influence of Influential Management Academic Outlets”,
Silviya Svejenova and José Luis Alvarez, November 1999.
108

Report 10 “The Consumption of Management Publications”, José Luis Alvarez and
Carmelo Mazza, March 2000.
Report 11 “The Content of European Management Ideas”, Lars Engwall and Cecilia
Pahlberg in collaboration with Rickard Danell, March 2001.
Report 12 “The Content of Management Education in Europe”, Rolv Petter Amdam,
Eirinn Larsen and Ragnhild Kvålshaugen, September 2000.
Report 13 “The Content of Consultancy Work: Knowledge Generation, Codification
and Dissemination”, Matthias Kipping and Thomas Armbrüster, October
2000.
Report 14 “The Role of Educational Background in Diffusion of Management
Knowledge”, Ragnhild Kvålshaugen, July 2001.
Report 15 “The Next Step: Media Influences on Knowledge-in-Practice”, Carmelo
Mazza and José Luis Alvarez, July 2001.
Report 16 “Consultancies and the Creation of European Management Practice”,
Matthias Kipping, July 2001.
Report 17 “The Diffusion of European Management Ideas”, Lars Engwall and Cecilia
Pahlberg in collaboration with Carin Eriksson and Jan Lindvall, October
2001.
7.6. PUBLICATIONS
7.6.1. Books
Alvarez, José Luis, Carmelo Mazza, and Jesper Strandgaard (eds.), 2001, “The Impact of the
Media in the Diffusion of Management Practices”, Proceedings of the Barcelona CEMP
Workshop, IESE Business School Press (forthcoming).
Amdam, Rolv Petter, Ragnhild Kvålshaugen and Eirinn Larsen (eds.) 2002, Inside the Business
Schools: Management Education in Europe, Oslo: Abstrakt Press.
Kipping, Matthias and Lars Engwall (eds.), 2002, Management Consulting: Emergence and
Dynamics of a Knowledge Industry, Oxford, Oxford University Press (forthcoming).
Kipping, Matthias and Ove Bjarnar, (eds.), 1998, The Americanisation of European Business.
The Marshall Plan and the Transfer of US Management Models, London: Routledge.
Kipping, Matthias, 2003, The Consultancy Business: Historical and Comparative Perspectives,
Oxford: Oxford University Press (forthcoming).
Kudo, Akira, Matthias Kipping and Harm Schröter (eds.), 2003, Transforming the American
Model: German and Japanese Industry in the Boom Years, London, Routledge (forthcoming).
Sahlin-Andersson, Kerstin and Lars Engwall, (eds.), 2002, Carriers of Management Knowledge:
Ideas and their Circulation, Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press (forthcoming).
109

7.6.2. Dissertations
Amdam, Rolv Petter, 1999, Utdanning, økonomi og ledelse: Fremveksten av den økonomiskadministrative
utdanningen 1936-1986, Oslo: Unipub forlag.
Byrkjeflot, Haldor, 1999, Modernisering og ledelse – om samfunnsmessige betingelser for
demokratisk lederskap, Doctoral dissertation, University of Bergen.
Danell, Rickard, 2001, Internationalization and Homogenization. A Bibliometric Study of
International Management Research, Doctoral dissertation, Umeå University.
Kvålshaugen, R., 2001, The Antecedents of Management Competence. The Role of Educational
Background and Type of Work Experience, Doctoral dissertation, Norwegian School of
Management, BI, Oslo, Norway.
7.6.3. Special Issues
Engwall Lars and Guje Sevón, 2000, “Spridningen av moderna managementidéer”, Special
issue of Nordiske Organisasjonsstudier, 2, No. 1.
Kipping, Matthias (ed.), 2000, “Les consultants”, special issue of Entreprises et Histoire, October.
7.6.4. Journal Articles
Alvarez, José Luis and Carmelo Mazza, 2000, “Haute Couture and Prêt-à-Porter: The Popular
Press and the Diffusion of Management Practices”, Organization Studies, 21, No. 3, pp. 567-
588.
Amdam, Rolv Petter, 1998, “American Influence on Management Education in Norway,
1945-1970s: The Role of Intermediate Organisations”, Enterprises et Histoire, No. 19, pp. 35-
45.
Amdam, Rolv Petter and Ove Bjarnar, 1999, “Networks and the Diffusion of Knowledge: The
Norwegian Industry Committee in New York During the Second World War”, Business and
Economic History, 28, No. 1, pp. 33-43.
Amdam, Rolv Petter, Ove Bjarnar and Hallgeir Gammelsæter, 2001, “Management Qualification
and Dissemination of Knowledge in Regional Innovation Systems”, Journal of Industrial
History, 4, No. 2, pp. 75-93.
Amorim, Celeste and Matthias Kipping, 1999, “Selling Consultancy Services: The Portuguese
Case in Historical and Comparative Perspective”, Business and Economic History, 28, No. 1.
Fall, pp. 45-56.
Byrkjeflot, Haldor, 1998, “Engineers and Management in Germany and the United States: A
Discussion of the Origins of Diversity in Management Systems”, Enterprises et Histoire, No.
19, pp. 47-74.
Byrkjeflot, Haldor, 1999, “Ledelsesutfordringer ved årtusenskiftet”, Magma, 5, pp. 35-46.
110

Byrkjeflot, Haldor, 2000, “Fortolkningen av Webers byråkratiske idealtype i organisasjonsteorin”,
Nordiske Organisasjonsstudier, 2, No. 2, pp. 5-28.
Crucini, Cristina, 1999, “The Development and Professionalisation of the Italian Consultancy
Market after WWII”, Business and Economic History, 28, Winter, pp. 7-18.
Crucini, Cristina, 2000, “Il mercato consulenziale italiano: operatori e tendenze”, Management
Consulting News, June, pp. 15-16.
Crucini, Cristina, 2000, “La consulenza in Italia e in Europa”, Sistemi & Impresa, December,
pp. 23-29.
Crucini, Cristina, 2000, “Consulenza di direzione sotto esame”, Management Consulting
News, March, pp. 15-16.
Crucina, Cristina, 2000, “Consulenti e associazioni”, Management Consulting News, October,
pp. 7-8.
Crucini, Cristina and Matthias Kipping, 2001, “Management Consultancies as Global Change
Agents? Evidence from Italy”, Journal of Organizational Change Management, 14, November,
pp. 570-589.
Engwall, Lars, 1998, “Research Note: Asterix in Disneyland. Management Scholars from
France on the World Stage”, Organization Studies, 19, No. 5, pp. 863-881.
Engwall, Lars, 1999, “L’influenza americana sulla formazione manageriale in Scandinavia”,
Nuova Civiltà delle Macchine, 27, No. 3, pp. 87-99.
Engwall, Lars, 1999, “Spridningen av managementidéer i Europa”, Ledmotiv, 1, No. 1, pp.
88-93.
Engwall, Lars, 2000, “Foreign Role Models and Standardisation in Nordic Business Education”,
Scandinavian Journal of Management, 16, No. 1, pp. 1-24.
Engwall, Lars, 2000, “The Globalisation of Management”, Zeitschrift für Betriebswirtschaft,
70, Ergänzungsheft 1, pp. 1-22.
Engwall, Lars and Cecilia Pahlberg, 2000, “Deregulation and Homogenisation. The Creation
of European Management Practice”, efmd FORUM magazine, No. 3, pp. 41-46.
Furusten, Staffan and Jonas Bäcklund, 2000, “Koncentration och differentiering på marknaden
för managementkonsultation i Sverige ”, Nordiske Organisasjonsstudier, 2, No. 1, pp. 60-
83.
Kipping, Matthias, 1999, “British Economic Decline: Blame It on the Consultants?”, Contemporary
British History, 13, Autumn, pp. 23-38.
Kipping, Matthias, 1999, “American Management Consulting Companies in Western Europe,
1920 to 1990: Products, Reputation and Relationships”, Business History Review, 73, Summer,
pp. 190-220.
Kipping, Matthias, 2000, “Looking Beyond the Rapid Growth: Shifts in the (European) Consultancy
Markets”, Management Consulting News, October, pp. 4-6.
111

Kipping, Matthias, 2000, “Consultancy and Conflicts: Bedaux at Lukens Steel and the Anglo-
Iranian Oil Company, Entreprises et Histoire, No. 25, October, pp. 9-25.
Kvålshaugen, Ragnhild and Rolv Petter Amdam, 1998, “Education and Social Construction of
Managerial Practice”, Vezetestudomany, 24, No. 7-8, pp. 80-91.
Kvålshaugen, Ragnhild and Rolv Petter Amdam, 2000, “Etablering og utvikling av ledelsekulturer:
Norsk kenningisme”, Nordiske Organisasjonsstudier, 2, No. 1, pp. 86-108.
Larsen, Eirinn, 1999, “Fra likestilling til mangfold. To tiår med kvinner og ledelse i bedriften”,
Nytt Norsk Tidsskrift, 2, pp. 114-125.
Lindvall, Jan and Cecilia Pahlberg, 2000, “Trendsättare och efterföljare – en studie av hur
moderna managementidéer används inom svenska multinationella företag”, Nordiske Organisasjonsstudier,
2, No. 1, pp. 34-59.
Sahlin-Andersson, Kerstin and Tina Hedmo, 2000, “Från spridning till reglering. MBAmodellens
utbredning och utveckling i Europa”, Nordiske Organisasjonsstudier, 2, No. 1, pp.
9-34.
7.6.5. Book Chapters
Amdam, Rolv Petter, 1999, “Towards Homogenisation of European Management Education?”,
Proceedings from the Asian Forum on Business Education 7 th Conference, Hong
Kong.
Amorim, Celeste, 1999, “Catching-up? The Evolution of Management Consultancies in Portugal
and Spain”, European Yearbook of Business History, No. 2, pp. 179-211.
Armbrüster, Thomas and Matthias Kipping, 2002, “Types of Knowledge and the Client-
Consultant Interaction”, in Kerstin Sahlin-Andersson and Lars Engwall (eds.), Carriers of
Management Knowledge: Ideas and their Circulation, Stanford University Press (forthcoming).
Byrkjeflot, Haldor, 2001, “The Nordic Model of Democracy and Management”, in Haldor
Byrkjeflot, Sissel Myklebust, Christine Myrvang, and Francis Sejersted (eds.), The Democratic
Challenge to Capitalism, Bergen, Fagbokforlaget, pp. 19-50.
Byrkjeflot, Haldor, 2002, “Management Models and Technical Education Systems; Germany
and the United States 1870-1930”, in Kerstin Sahlin-Andersson and Lars Engwall (eds.), Carriers
of Management Knowledge: Ideas and their Circulation, Stanford University Press
(forthcoming).
Byrkjeflot, Haldor, 2002, “Nordic Management: From Functional Socialism to Shareholder
Value”, in Barbara Czarniawska and Guje Sevón (eds.), The Northern Lights: Organization
Theory in Scandinavia, LiberAbstrakt (forthcoming).
Crucini, Cristina, 2002, “Knowledge Management at Country Level: A Large Consulting
Firm in Italy”, in Matthias Kipping and Lars Engwall (eds.), Management Consulting: Emergence
and Dynamics of a Knowledge Industry, Oxford, Oxford University Press (forthcoming).
112

Engwall, Lars, 2001, “Managerial Capitalism Revisited”, in Joachim Schwalbach (ed.), Corporate
Governance. Essays in Honor of Horst Albach, Berlin: Springer, pp. 173-191.
Engwall, Lars, 2001, “Från Taylor till Tetra. Ruben Rausings rötter i rationaliseringsrörelsen”,
in Olle Matsson et al. (eds.), Libens Merito. Acta Academiœ Regiœ Scientiarum Upsaliensis.
Kungliga Vetenskapssamhällets i Uppsala Handlingar 21, pp. 121-133.
Engwall, Lars, 2001, “Farewell to the Rational, Invisible Hand! Management Models in
Scandinavia”, in: Haldor Byrkjeflot, Sisel Myklebust, Christine Myrvang and Francis Sejerstedt
(eds.), Scandinavian Management Revisited. Nordic Industrial Elites Facing the Democratic
Challenge, Bergen: Fagbogforlaget, pp. 291-316.
Engwall, Lars and Rickard Danell, 2002, “The Behavioral Theory of the Firm in Action”, in
Mie Auger and James G. March (eds.), The Economics of Change, Choice and Structure: Essays
in the Memory of Richard M. Cyert, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar (forthcoming).
Engwall, Lars, Staffan Furusten and Eva Wallerstedt, 2002, “The Changing Relationship between
Management Consulting and Academia: Evidence from Sweden”, in Matthias Kipping
and Lars Engwall (eds.), Management Consulting: Emergence and Dynamics of a Knowledge
Industry, Oxford, Oxford University Press (forthcoming).
Engwall, Lars and Matthias Kipping, 2002, “Introduction”, in Matthias Kipping and Lars
Engwall (eds.), Management Consulting: Emergence and Dynamics of a Knowledge Industry,
Oxford, Oxford University Press (forthcoming).
Gammelsæter, Hallgeir, 2002, “Managers and Consultants as Embedded Actors: Evidence
from Norway”, in Matthias Kipping and Lars Engwall (eds.), Management Consulting:
Emergence and Dynamics of a Knowledge Industry, Oxford, Oxford University Press
(forthcoming).
Kipping, M., 1999, “The Changing Nature of the Business–Government Relationship in
Western Europe after 1945”, European Yearbook of Business History, No. 2, pp. 35-51.
Kipping, Matthias, 1999, “Management und Transfer von Organisationskulturen”, in: F. Meyer-Krahmer
and S. Lange (eds.), Geisteswissenschaften und Innovationen, Heidelberg, Physica-Verlag,
pp. 274-284.
Kipping, Matthias, 1999, “Les consultants et la prise de décision dans l’entreprise dans une
perspective historique et comparative”, in Décision et Gestion, Toulouse, Presses de
l’Université des Sciences Sociales de Toulouse, pp. 367-379 (Collection Histoire, Gestion,
Organisations No. 7).
Kipping, Matthias, 2001, “The Evolution of Management Consultancy: Its Origins and Global
Development”, in B. Curnow and J. Reuvid (eds.), The International Guide to Management
Consultancy, London, Kogan Page, pp. 20-32.
Kipping, Matthias, 2002, “Trapped in their Wave: The Evolution of Management Consultancies”,
in: Timothy Clark and Robin Fincham (eds.), Critical Consulting, Oxford, Blackwell,
pp. 28-49.
Kipping, Matthias and Thomas Armbrüster, 2002, “The Burden of Otherness: Limits of Consultancy
Interventions in Historical Case Studies”, in Matthias Kipping and Lars Engwall
(eds.), Management Consulting: Emergence and Dynamics of a Knowledge Industry, Oxford,
Oxford University Press (forthcoming).
113

Mazza, Carmelo and José Luis Alvarez, 2002, “Gourmet Meal for Fast-food Managers?”, in
Kristian Kreiner and S. Scheuer (eds.) Research and Praxis, Copenhagen, IOA Press (forthcoming)
Mazza, Carmelo and Paolo Quattrone, 2001, ”Dall’organizzazione del sapere al sapere organizzato?
Il sistema universitario italiano alla prova del mercato”, in La cultura delle amministrazioni
pubbliche fra retorica e innovazione (F. Battistelli ed.). Milano: Franco Angeli, pp.
149-164.
Sahlin-Andersson, Kerstin and Lars Engwall, 2002, “Carriers, Flows and Sources of Management
Knowledge”, in Kerstin Sahlin-Andersson and Lars Engwall (eds.), Carriers of
Management Knowledge: Ideas and their Circulation, Stanford University Press (forthcoming).
Sahlin-Andersson, Kerstin and Lars Engwall, 2002, “Variations of Management Knowledge”,
in Kerstin Sahlin-Andersson and Lars Engwall (eds.), Carriers of Management Knowledge:
Ideas and their Circulation, Stanford University Press (forthcoming).
7.6.6. Book Reviews
Engwall, Lars, 2002, “Book Review of Colin Hay and David Marsh (eds.), Demystifying
Globalization”, Enterprise & Society (forthcoming).
Engwall, Lars, 2002, “Book Review of Susanna Fellman, Uppkomsten av en direktörsprofession”,
Scandinavian Economic History Review (forthcoming).
7.6.7. Reports
Alvarez, José Luis and Aurora Inglés, 2001, “The Impact of the Media in the Rise and Fall of
the President of Spanish Telefónica”, IESE Case DG-1349.
Amorim, Celeste, 2000, “Translating Popular Management Ideas. The Interplay between
Standardisation and Customisation”, The University of Reading, Discussion Papers in Economics
and Management, Series A, Vol. XIII (2000/2001), No. 421.
Byrkjeflot, Haldor, 2001, “Management Education and Selection of Top Managers in Europe
and the United States”, LOS Report R0103.
Byrkjeflot, Haldor, 2001, “Management Models and Technical Education Systems in Germany
and the United States 1870-1930”, LOS Notat N0108.
Byrkjeflot, Haldor, 2001, “E-learning Alliances, The New Partnerships in Business Education”,
LOS Notat N0102.
Crucini, Cristina and Matthias Kipping, 2000, “The Role of Small Consultancies in Global-
Knowledge Economies: Evidence from Italy”, University of Reading, Discussion Papers in
International Investment and Management, Series B, Vol. XIII (2000-2001), No. 283.
Kipping, Matthias and Celeste Amorim, 1999/2000, “Consultancies as Management Schools”,
The University of Reading, Discussion Papers in Economics and Management, Series A, Vol.
XII, No. 409.
114

Kipping, Matthias, Staffan Furusten and Hallgeir Gammelsæter, 1998/99, “ Converging towards
American Dominance? Developments and Structures of the Consultancy Field in Western
Europe”, The University of Reading, Discussion Papers in Economics and Management,
Series A, Vol. XI, No. 398.
Mazza, Carmelo and Jesper Strandgaard, 2001, “Good Reading Makes Good Action: Nothing
So Practical as a Prestigious Story”, CBS Research Paper Series, Copenhagen.
7.7. PARTICIPANTS IN CEMP ACTIVITIES
7.7.1. Track at the 14 th EGOS Colloquium in Maastricht, 9-11 July 1998
José Luis Alvarez IESE, Barcelona Spain
Rolv Petter Amdam Norwegian School of Management Norway
Jos Benders Nijmegen Business School The Netherlands
Mark van Bijsterveld Nijmegen Business School The Netherlands
Finn Borum Copenhagen Business School Denmark
Tim Brady University of Brighton UK
Haldor Byrkjeflot University of Bergen Norway
Rickard Danell Umeå University Sweden
Andrew Davis University of Sussex UK
Marie-Laure Djelic ESSEC, Paris France
Hans Dooreward Nijmegen Business School The Netherlands
Richard Elliott Oxford University UK
Lars Engwall Uppsala University Sweden
Andreas Fili Uppsala University Sweden
Staffan Furusten SCORE, Stockholm Sweden
Yiannis Gabriel University of Bath UK
Hallgeir Gammelsæter Molde University College Norway
Tina Hedmo Uppsala University Sweden
Paul Jeffcut Queen’s University, Belfast UK
Alfred Kieser University of Mannheim Germany
Nils Kinch Uppsala University Sweden
Matthias Kipping University of Reading UK
Peter Kjær Copenhagen Business School Denmark
Ragnhild Kvålshaugen Norwegian School of Management Norway
Eirinn Larsen Norwegian School of Management Norway
115

Juha Laurila Helsinki School of Economics Finland
Kari Lilja Helsinki School of Economics Finland
Jan Lindvall Uppsala University Sweden
Carmelo Mazza IESE, Barcelona Spain
Karl Moore Oxford University UK
Cecilia Pahlberg Uppsala University Sweden
Kjell Arne Røvik University of Tromsø Norway
Charles-Clemens Rüling University of Geneva Switzerland
Kerstin Sahlin-Andersson SCORE, Stockholm Sweden
Jesper Strandgaard Pedersen Copenhagen Business School Denmark
Andrew Sturdy University of Bath UK
Junko Takagi ESSEC, Paris France
Sander Verlaar Nijmegen Business School The Netherlands
Linda Wedlin Uppsala University Sweden
Nicolay Worren Oxford University UK
Eva Zeuthen Bentsen Copenhagen Business School Denmark
Anders Örtenblad University College of Halmstad Sweden
7.7.2. Workshop at IMD in Lausanne, 20-21 November 1998
Rolv Petter Amdam Norwegian School of Management Norway
Peter van Baalen Erasmus University, Rotterdam The Netherlands
Haldor Byrkjeflot University of Bergen Norway
Roy Edwards London School of Economics UK
Lars Engwall Uppsala University Sweden
Neil Fligstein European University Institute Italy
Giuliana Gemelli University of Bologna Italy
Tina Hedmo Uppsala University Sweden
Ragnhild Kvålshaugen Norwegian School of Management Norway
Eirinn Larsen Norwegian School of Management Norway
Peter Lorange IMD, Lausanne Switzerland
Carmelo Mazza IESE, Barcelona Spain
Cecilia Pahlberg Uppsala University Sweden
Bendict Rodenstock University of Bologna Italy
Jesper Strandgaard Pedersen Copenhagen Business School Denmark
116

Nick Tiratsoo University of Luton UK
John F. Wilson Manchester Metropolitan University UK
7.7.3. Co-ordination and Integration Meeting in Oslo, 23-25 April 1999
José Luis Alvarez IESE, Barcelona Spain
Rolv Petter Amdam Norwegian School of Management Norway
Thomas Armbrüster University of Reading UK
Haldor Byrkjeflot University of Bergen Norway
Lars Engwall Uppsala University Sweden
Carin Eriksson Uppsala University Sweden
Matthias Kipping University of Reading UK
Ragnhild Kvålshaugen Norwegian School of Management Norway
Cecilia Pahlberg Uppsala University Sweden
7.7.4. Track at the 15 th EGOS Colloquium in Warwick, 4-6 July 1999
José Luis Alvarez IESE, Barcelona Spain
Santos Alvarez Universidad de Valladolid Spain
Rolv Petter Amdam Norwegian School of Management Norway
Celeste Amorim University of Reading UK
Reva Berman Brown University College Northampton UK
Haldor Byrkjeflot University of Bergen Norway
Jonas Bäcklund SCORE, Stockholm Sweden
Cristina Crucini University of Reading UK
Lars Engwall Uppsala University Sweden
Carin Eriksson Uppsala University Sweden
Michael Faust University of Tübingen Germany
Michel Ferrary ESSEC, Paris France
Beyza Furman Istanbul Bilgi University Turkey
Staffan Furusten SCORE, Stockholm Sweden
Hallgeir Gammelsæter Molde University College Norway
Clara Eugenia García Universidad Carlos III de Madrid Spain
Tina Hedmo Uppsala University Sweden
Cornelia Hegele University of Mannheim Germany
Alan Jenkins ESSEC, Paris France
117

Anne Marie Jess Hansen Copenhagen Business School Denmark
Inga-Lill Johansson Gothenburg University Sweden
Alfred Kieser University of Mannheim Germany
Matthias Kipping University of Reading UK
Jan Lindvall Uppsala University Sweden
Garcia Merino Universidad de Valladolid Spain
Michael Müller University of Innsbruck Austria
Cecilia Pahlberg Uppsala University Sweden
Fabrizio Panozzo Universitá Ca’ Foscari di Venezia Italy
Rodriguez Pinto Universidad de Valladolid Spain
Charles-Clemens Rüling University of Geneva Switzerland
Kjell Arne Røvik University of Tromsø Norway
Stefan Salzgeber University of Innsbruck Austria
Özlem Soylu Istanbul Bilgi University Turkey
Larry Stapleton Waterford Institute of Technology Ireland
Jesper Strandgaard Pedersen Copenhagen Business School Denmark
Andrew Sturdy University of Bath UK
Behlül Üsdiken Sabanci University Turkey
Anders Örtenblad University College of Halmstad Sweden
7.7.5. Track at the Nordic Conference on Business Studies in Helsinki, 19-21 August 1999
Rolv Petter Amdam Norwegian School of Management Norway
Finn Borum Copenhagen Business School Denmark
Henrik Bäckström Uppsala University Sweden
Barbara Czarniawska Gothenburg University Sweden
Rickard Danell Umeå University Sweden
Lars Engwall Uppsala University Sweden
Anders Forssell SCORE, Stockholm Sweden
Staffan Furusten SCORE, Stockholm Sweden
Nils Kinch Uppsala University Sweden
Ragnhild Kvålshaugen Norwegian School of Management Norway
Jan Lindvall Uppsala University Sweden
Carmelo Mazza IESE, Barcelona Spain
Bettina Mogensen Copenhagen Business School Denmark
118

Cecilia Pahlberg Uppsala University Sweden
Kerstin Sahlin-Andersson SCORE, Stockholm Sweden
Jesper Strandgaard Pedersen Copenhagen Business School Denmark
Martin Rogberg Stockholm School of Economics Sweden
Guje Sevón Copenhagen Business School Denmark
Andreas Werr Stockholm School of Economics Sweden
Karin Winroth Gothenburg University Sweden
7.7.6. Workshop at SCANCOR, Stanford, 16-17 September 1999
Rolv Petter Amdam Norwegian School of Management Norway
Thomas Armbrüster University of Reading UK
Steinar Askvik University of Bergen Norway
Nikolaus Beck University of Mannheim Germany
Nils Brunsson SCORE, Stockholm Sweden
Haldor Byrkjeflot University of Bergen Norway
Lars Engwall Uppsala University Sweden
Carin Eriksson Uppsala University Sweden
Berit Ernst University of Mannheim Germany
Bjarne Espedal Norwegian School of Economics Norway
Andreas Fili Uppsala University Sweden
Staffan Furusten SCORE, Stockholm Sweden
Christina Garsten SCORE, Stockholm Sweden
Royston Greenwood University of Alberta Canada
Yong Suk Jang Stanford University USA
Luchien Karsten University of Groningen The Netherlands
Alfred Kieser University of Mannheim Germany
Nils Kinch Uppsala University Sweden
Matthias Kipping University of Reading UK
Jan Lindvall Uppsala University Sweden
Rose Xiaowei Luo Stanford University USA
Christopher McKenna John Hopkins University USA
James G. March Stanford University USA
John Meyer Stanford University USA
Hyeyoung Moon Stanford University USA
119

Cecilia Pahlberg Uppsala University Sweden
Walter Powell Stanford University USA
Kjell Arne Røvik University of Tromsø Norway
Martin Ruef Stanford University USA
Charles-Clemens Rüling Copenhagen Business School Denmark
Kerstin Sahlin-Andersson Uppsala University Sweden
Jesper Strandgaard Pedersen Copenhagen Business School Denmark
Anders Söderholm Royal Institute of Technology Sweden
Roy Suddaby University of Alberta Canada
Nick Tiratsoo University of Luton UK
Kees van Veen University of Groningen The Netherlands
Marc Ventresca Northwestern University USA
Peter Walgenbach University of Mannheim Germany
Eva Wallerstedt Uppsala University Sweden
Linda Wedlin Uppsala University Sweden
7.7.7. Workshop on Consultants, Reading, 15-16 October 1999
Thomas Armbrüster University of Reading UK
Jos Benders Nijmegen Business School The Netherlands
Timothy Clark King’s College, London UK
Lars Engwall Uppsala University Sweden
Staffan Furusten SCORE, Stockholm Sweden
Hallgeir Gammelsæter Molde University College Norway
Odile Henry University of Paris France
Luchien Karsten University of Groningen The Netherlands
Alfred Kieser University of Mannheim Germany
Matthias Kipping University of Reading UK
Cecilia Pahlberg Uppsala University Sweden
Kees van Veen University of Groningen The Netherlands
Chris Wright University of New South Wales Australia
7.7.8. Workshop on Management Education, Paris, 4-6 May 2000
José Luis Alvarez IESE, Barcelona Spain
Rolv Petter Amdam Norwegian School of Management Norway
120

Peter van Baalen Erasmus University, Rotterdam The Netherlands
Sami Boutaiba Copenhagen Business School Denmark
Haldor Byrkjeflot University of Bergen Norway
Laurence de Carlo ESSEC, Paris France
Roy Edwards University of Southhampton UK
Lars Engwall Uppsala University Sweden
Giuliana Gemelli University of Bologna Italy
Claudia Gross Germany
Tina Hedmo Uppsala University Sweden
Luchien Karsten University of Groningen The Netherlands
Matthias Kipping University of Reading UK
Ragnhild Kvålshaugen Norwegian School of Management Norway
Eirinn Larsen Norwegian School of Management Norway
Birgitte Løland Norwegian School of Management Norway
Bettina Mogensen Copenhagen Business School Denmark
Cecilia Pahlberg Uppsala University Sweden
Núria Puig Univ. Complutense de Madrid Spain
Jesper Strandgaard Pedersen Copenhagen Business School Denmark
Junko Takagi ESSEC, Paris France
Minna Takala Helsinki University of Technology Finland
Nick Tiratsoo University of Luton UK
Behlül Üsdiken Sabanci University Turkey
Agnete Vabø NIFU, Oslo Norway
Linda Wedlin Uppsala University Sweden
John Wilson Queen’s University, Belfast UK
7.7.9 Conference on External Experts, Reading, 19-20 May 2000
Doreen Arnoldus Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam The Netherlands
Bram Bouwens University of Utrecht The Netherlands
Ludovic Cailluet University of Toulouse France
Joost Dankers University of Utrecht The Netherlands
Wilfried Feldenkirchen University of Erlangen-Nuremberg Germany
Paul Hek Erasmus University, Rotterdam The Netherlands
Susanne Hilger University of Erlangen-Nuremberg Germany
121

Ulrich Nocken University of Düsseldorf Germany
Judy Slinn Oxford Brookes University UK
Judith Wale University of Warwick UK
Horst Wessel Mannesmann Archives Germany
7.7.10. Round Table on Consultant-Client Relationships, Toulouse, 20 June 2000
Patrick Antier A. D. Little, Paris France
Gilles Arnaud Groupe ESC, Toulouse France
Jacques Igalens University of Toulouse France
Christian Mille PricewaterhouseCoopers France
Bernard Ramanantsoa HEC, Paris France
Bruno Rosellini la Poste France
Gérard de Saint-Rémy Chambre Syndicale de l'Aluminium France
7.7.11. Summer School outside Helsinki, 25 June-1 July 2000
Celeste Amorim University of Reading UK
Drew Baldwin Umeå University Sweden
Paul Collin University of Lyon France
Cristina Crucini University of Reading UK
Siw Fosstenløkken Norwegian School of Management Norway
Claudia Gross University of Reading UK
Jussi Halttunen University of Jyväskylä Finland
Tina Hedmo Uppsala University Sweden
Helle Hein Copenhagen Business School Denmark
Aurora Ingles Vendrell IESE, Barcelona Spain
Signe Jarlov Copenhagen Business School Denmark
Linn Johansson Swedish School of Economics Finland
Mirel Leino Swedish School of Economics Finland
Jon Erland Lervik Norwegian School of Management Norway
Otieno Mbare Åbo Akademi Finland
Sölvi Nilsen Norwegian School of Management Norway
Jesper Piihl University of Southern Denmark Denmark
Atle Raa Norwegian School of Management Norway
Majbritt Rostgaard Evald University of Southern Denmark Denmark
122

Kaisa Snellman Swedish School of Economics Finland
Michael Taarnby Århus University Denmark
Tuija Toivola Espoo Vantaa Polytechnic Finland
Linda Wedlin Uppsala University Sweden
Emma Vironmäki University of Tampere Finland
Sari Yli-Kauhaluoma Helsinki School of Economics Finland
7.7.12. Track at the 16 th EGOS Colloquium in Helsinki, 2-4 July 2000
Antti Ainamo Helsinki School of Economics Finland
José Luis Alvarez IESE, Barcelona Spain
Rolv Petter Amdam Norwegian School of Management Norway
Celeste Amorim University of Reading UK
Jos Benders Nijmegen Business School The Netherlands
Nils Brunsson Stockholm School of Economics Sweden
Haldor Byrkjeflot University of Bergen Norway
Chris Carr University of Edinburgh UK
Timothy Clark King’s College, London UK
Lars Engwall Uppsala University Sweden
Berit Ernst University of Mannheim Germany
Michael Faust University of Göttingen Germany
Valerie Fournier Keele University UK
Michal Frenkel Tel Aviv University Israel
Beyza Furman Istanbul Bilgi University Turkey
Staffan Furusten SCORE, Stcokholm Sweden
Hallgeir Gammelsæter Molde University College Norway
Clara Eugenia García Universidad Carlos III de Madrid Spain
Christopher Grey University of Cambridge UK
Stefan Heusinkveld Nijmegen Business School The Netherlands
Arzu Iseri Bogazici University, Istanbul Turkey
Serdar Karabati Istanbul Bilgi University Turkey
Alfred Kieser University of Mannheim Germany
Ragnhild Kvålshaugen Norwegian School of Management Norway
Jon Erland Lervik Norwegian School of Management Norway
Randi Lunnan Norwegian School of Management Norway
123

Carmelo Mazza IESE, Barcelona Spain
Michael Mayer University of Glasgow UK
Bill McQueen University of Brighton UK
Keith Perks University of Brighton UK
Kjell Arne Røvik University of Tromsø Norway
Janne Tienari Lappeenranta Univ. of Technology Finland
Laura Mercer Traavik Norwegian School of Management Norway
Silviya Svejenova Nedeva IESE, Barcelona Spain
Linda Wedlin Uppsala University Sweden
Richard Whittington University of Oxford UK
7.7.13. Workshop on the Management Advice Industry, Brussels 17-18 November 2000
Jonas Bäcklund SCORE, Stockholm Sweden
Isabelle Berreri-Hofmann CNRS-HEC, Paris France
Anthony Berry Manchester Business School UK
Thomas Borghoff Universität Dortmund Germany
Timothy Clark King’s College, London UK
Lars Engwall Uppsala University Sweden
Carin Eriksson Uppsala University Sweden
Robert Fildes Lancaster University UK
Robin Fincham Stirling University UK
Clara Eugenia García Universidad Carlos III de Madrid Spain
Lyn Glanz Erasmus University, Rotterdam Switzerland
Brad Jackson Victoria University of Wellington New Zealand
Matthias Kipping University of Reading UK
Jim Kitay University of Sydney Australia
Stuart Macdonald University of Sheffield UK
Daniel Ondrack University of Toronto Canada
Michael Power London School of Economics UK
Denis Saint-Martin Université de Montreal Canada
Gerhard Smid SIOO, Utrecht The Netherlands
Janne Tienari Lappeenranta University of Tech. Finland
Iolanda Vieira Escola Superior de Technologia Portugal
Klaasjan Visscher University of Twente The Netherlands
124

Andreas Werr Stockholm School of Economics Sweden
Christopher Wright University of New South Wales Australia
7.7.14. Workshop on the Management Media Industry, Barcelona 1-3 December 2000
José Luis Alvarez IESE, Barcelona Spain
Henrik Bäckström Åbo Akademi Finland
Tania Becerra IESE, Barcelona Spain
Jos Benders Nijmegen Business School The Netherlands
Haldor Byrkjeflot University of Bergen Norway
Chris Carter University of Leicester UK
Timothy Clark King’s College, London UK
Ianna Contardo Warwick Business School UK
Lars Engwall Uppsala University Sweden
Michal Frenkel Tel Aviv University Israel
Beyza Furman Istanbul Bilgi University Turkey
Ian Graham University of Edinburgh UK
Claudia Gross University of Reading UK
Tina Hedmo Uppsala University Sweden
Stefan Heusinkveld Nijmegen Business School The Netherlands
Arzu Iseri Bogazici University, Istanbul Turkey
Brad Jackson Victoria University of Wellington New Zealand
Signe Jarlov Copenhagen Business School Denmark
Peter Kjær Copenhagen Business School Denmark
Roy Langer Copenhagen Business School Denmark
Boje Larsen Copenhagen Business School Denmark
Ashley Lloyd University of Edinburgh UK
Carmelo Mazza Copenhagen Business School Denmark
Frank Mueller University of Leicester UK
Tatiana Pipan Università di Roma Italy
Anette Risberg Jönköping Int. Business School Sweden
Kerstin Sahlin-Andersson Uppsala University Sweden
Harry Scarbrough University of Leicester UK
Yehouda Shenhav Tel Aviv University Israel
Roger Slack University of Lancaster UK
125

Jesper Strandgaard Pedersen Copenhagen Business School Denmark
Ahmet Suerdem Istanbul Bilgi University Turkey
Jacky Swan Warwick Business School UK
Janne Tienari Lappeenranta Univ. of Technology Finland
Eero Vaara Helsinki School of Economics Finland
Linda Wedlin Uppsala University Sweden
Robin Williams University of Edinburgh UK
7.7.15. Workshop on Implementation, Molde 4-6 May 2001
Rolv Petter Amdam Norwegian School of Management Norway
Celeste Amorim University of Reading UK
Nikolaus Beck University of Mannheim Germany
Ove Bjarnar Molde University College Norway
Christian de Cock University of Exeter UK
Lars Engwall Uppsala University Sweden
Krista Finstad-Milion University of Metz France
Hallgeir Gammelsæter Molde University College Norway
Ingmar Gehrke ESSEC, Paris France
Matthias Kipping University of Reading UK
Michael Mayer University of Glasgow UK
Turid Moldenæs University of Tromsø Norway
Frank Mueller University of Leicester UK
Rudi Rozman University of Ljubljana Slovenia
Philippe Zarlowski ESSEC, Paris France
Sükrü Özen Baskent University Turkey
7.7.16. Track at the 17 th EGOS Colloquium in Lyon, 5-7 July 2001
Katerina Adam Stockholm University Sweden
Sverker Alänge Chalmers University of Technology Sweden
Rolv Petter Amdam Norwegian School of Management Norway
Doreen Arnoldus Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam The Netherlands
Jos Benders Nijmegen Business School The Netherlands
Jelle Bezemer University of Groningen The Netherlands
Morten Brattvoll Bodø Regional University Norway
126

Mike Bresnen Warwick Business School UK
Haldor Byrkjeflot University of Bergen Norway
Ludovic Cailluet University of Toulouse France
Ian Clark Demontfort University, Leicester UK
Christian Defelix Grenoble University France
Robin Fincham Stirling University UK
Nils Finstad Nordland Research Institute UK
Peter Fleming University of Melbourne Australia
Hallgeir Gammelsæter Molde University College Norway
Johan Hansson Stockholm University Sweden
Sture Berg Helgesen University of Bergen Norway
Stefan Heusinkveld Nijmegen Business School The Netherlands
Jim Kitay University of Sydney Australia
Gro Kvåle Bodø Regional University Norway
Ragnhild Kvålshaugen Norwegian School of Management Norway
Jon Erland Lervik Norwegian School of Management Norway
Pascal Miconnet Chalmers University of Technology Sweden
Núria Puig Univ. Complutense de Madrid Spain
Robin Roslender Stirling University UK
John Damm Scheuer Copenhagen Business School Denmark
Ørjan Stene University of Bergen Norway
Andrew Sturdy University of Melbourne Australia
Jacky Swan Warwick Business School UK
Janne Tienari Lappeenranta Univ. of Technology Finland
Kees van Veen University of Groningen The Netherlands
Sally Woodward City University Business School UK
127