SCANCOR ANNUAL REPORT 2004

The mission of SCANCOR is to facilitate international collaboration in the social sciences and management research focusing on organizations, innovation, and public and private sector reforms. This mission is pursued by providing scholars from Scandinavia and occasionally elsewhere with an opportunity to study and conduct research within a research community at Stanford University. We also pursue our mission by providing an infrastructure for more seasoned researchers to build and maintain networks of collaboration. SCANCOR constitutes a venue for academic meetings, seminars and conferences with attendance from many universities and from many countries. Hence, SCANCOR functions primarily as a “research venue”.

The visiting scholarsThe year 2004 has been a very productive year for SCANCOR – with a large number of applicants, many more than could be accommodated at the SCANCOR office facility. In total SCANCOR has hosted 29 visiting and affiliated scholars. Visiting scholars are provided with an office, whereas affiliated scholars are not provided with private offices but do have access to the SCANCOR facility for their work. Of the 29 scholars, 11 (38%) were Ph.D. students and 18 (62%) were professors with and without tenure. This year we have had a productive blend of senior and junior faculty and Ph.D. students. The gender composition of the visiting scholars has been 58 % male and 42% female. (See appendixes 1, 6, 10, 11).

SCANCOR activitiesAction has been taken in 2004 to strengthen the involvement of Stanford faculty and students in SCANCOR activities and vice versa. Some administrative routines have been changed, e.g. coordinating applications with the Stanford quarter system and encouraging applicants to make contact with Stanford faculty prior to their arrival in California. Efforts have also been made to inform and engage the visiting scholars in some of the many academic opportunities that Stanford has to offer; e.g. through presenting them with information on available courses and campus academic culture and through encouraging them to participate in these activities as well as in the multitude of seminars and workshops offered at other Stanford departments.

The executive Director of SCANCOR, Woody Powell, organizes an active and engaging weekly seminar at SCANCOR. These seminars draw speakers and participants from all over the Stanford campus, and from other U.S. universities as well, to provide the visiting scholars with a unique opportunity to meet faculty members and participate in the ensuing discussions of their research activities. (See Appendix 5).

Apart from the formal SCANCOR seminars there is an informal workshop that allows visiting scholars to present their work-in-progress. These informal seminars are organized regularly to provide all visiting scholars at SCANCOR with an opportunity to present their work and discuss it amongst their peers.

1

Both the informal and formal seminars have been very well attended.

As is the custom, SCANCOR hosted two conferences in 2004. The Scancor Institutions Conference focused on explaining institutional change within the themes: the role of code-breakers, pathways of institutional change, competing institutional logics and the formation and circulation of templates. (See Appendix 2). The conference prompted plans for a volume on the topic. Kerstin Sahlin-Andersson, Finn Borum, Huggy Rao, and Woody Powell have taken on the task of editing the book, which collects a number of papers and new essays on themes of industrial transformation.

The conference Corporate Social Responsibilities in the Era of the Tranforming Welfare State was organized in collaboration with the SSRC (Social Science Research Council, New York) and covered topics such as the shifting boundaries among states, corporations and civil society, the professionalization of CSR and the emergence of templates for CSR. The conference was held on May 6th - 8th 2004 in Florence, Italy, at the New York University site of La Pietra. With this conference we sought to (1) attempt to push the field forward at a theoretical level, (2) bring together scholars from Europe and the United States, and (3) link these issues to the larger trends in today’s society. This mix of theoretical perspectives and empirical studies created a lively discussion and bases on the presented papers driving forces for the more or less global trend of CSR was explored. We also identified and analyzed in some detail differences over time, between Europe and the United States and between countries, regions and industries in terms of how CSR has been formed. The contextualizing the trend of CSR in such ways led us to interesting discussion concerning the rights and duties or corporations in different societies. This latter theme was identified as an important theme for further comparative studies and discussions. Around 25 scholars participated with presentations of papers. The group of participants was an interdisciplinary mix of scholars from various parts the United States and Europe. Based on this workshop plans were drawn up for a future edited volume. We found that the most interesting aspects that were explored at the conference would form an important starting point to be developed further in papers and workshops in order to create a coherent and interesting volume. (See Appendix 3.

The Conference in 2003 Universities and the Production of Knowledge has led to a special issue of the journal Higher Education (January 2005) that featured the best papers from the conference.

In 2004 another SCANCOR-related activity was expanded. The School of Economics and Commercial Law at Gothenburg University has for the last three years hosted a Ph.D. workshop at SCANCOR, in which Stanford faculty have presented the Ph.D. students from Gothenburg and Chalmers University with theoretical and methodological insights into various ‘Approaches to the Study of Markets and Institutions’. In 2004 this workshop was opened up for a limited number of participants (approximately two) from

2

each of the other Scandinavian countries. (See Appendix 4). The workshop was quite a success, and will be repeated in 2005. This time, however, the Stanford faculty will come to Scandinavia (Denmark). This PhD workshop, along with the formal seminars, helps strengthen the involvement of Stanford faculty and students in SCANCOR activities.

The board encourages, and will continue to financially support, all academic activities that will further the institutionalization of SCANCOR with Stanford University.

The facilitiesSCANCOR received new office furniture – desks and book shelves – in November 2004. Designed by the Danish furniture company ‘Montana’, the desks can be adjusted in height and the books shelves are modular. This not only provides the visiting scholars with a nicer aesthetic, but also with a quite flexible office setting. The new office furniture is a great improvement over the former furniture, which dated back to 1989. The Board thanks Kristian Kreiner for his orchestration of this re-furbishing of the SCANCOR facilities.

Thanks to the efforts of Kristian Kreiner and Marianne Risberg, SCANCOR launched a new website in 2004. The homepage has been moved to Copenhagen Business School, and Marianne Risberg is responsible for updating it. The homepage serves as a useful tool for applicants and will hopefully also become an important and helpful tool for sharing information and interacting within the SCANCOR community. Initial feedback from the users indicates that some minor improvements need to be made with regard to the information provided.

The boardThe board replacement policy started in 2001 and was continued in 2004. This time, Susse Georg replaced the Chairman Professor Kristian Kreiner in July 2004.

The board extends its sincere thanks to Kristian Kreiner for his innovative approach and his efforts in helping to make SCANCOR what it is today. Kristian Kreiner is a member of SCANCOR’s extended board, along with Per Lægreid, Kari Lilja and Kerstin Sahlin-Andersson.

The challenges to comeSCANCOR faces several, interrelated challenges: The first is continuing to develop academic activities that will make SCANCOR more interesting for Stanford faculty and to further participation in SCANCOR by Stanford faculty and PhD students. The second challenge is to enhance the recruitment of more senior Scandinavian scholars so as, on the one hand, to strike a better balance between Ph.D. students and more experienced scholars and, on the other, to help build a compelling research community. The Board’s ambition is to foster stronger ties between Scandinavian and Stanford scholars. On a less intellectual note, just as furniture has been upgraded at SCANCOR, it is time to consider refreshing office and computer equipment.

3

For the appendixes referred to in the report please see www.scancor.org. Here you will find additional information on SCANCOR, scholar policies, visiting scholars, addresses and links, planned conferences and workshops, etc

Susse GeorgChairman

4

Appendix 1

Visiting Scholars – SCANCOR 2004Name Position Insitution Time of

stayField

Sarah Almbjerg PhD student Copenhagen Business School 01-01-2004 01-04-2004 Social Networks, Entrepreneurship, Innovation

Maria Andenfelt Asst. Professor Uppsala University 01-01-2004 15-12-2004 International businessEnrico Baraldi Asst. Professor Uppsala University 01-01-2004 01-09-2004 Innovation studies and industrial

networksJozef Bátora PhD student University of Oslo 01-08-2003 01-07-2004 Public policy/international

relations

Ivar Bleiklie Professor University of Bergen 01-09-2003 01-08-2004 Comparative public policyKarin Brunsson PhD Allmänna Ord i Sverige 01-10-2004 01-02-2005 Management

Nils Brunsson Professor Stockholm School of Economics

01-10-2004 01-02-2005 Organizations, standardization

Henrik Bruun Sr. Researcher Helsinki Institute of Science and Technology Studies

01-08-2004 01-08-2005 Science & technology studies

Helena Buhr PhD student Uppsala University 01-09-2004 01-07-2005 OrganizationsKarina Skovaang

Christensen PhD student Aarhus University 01-10-2003 01-04-2004 Intrapreneurship

Francesco Ciabuschi Asst. Professor Uppsala University 01-11-2004 01-07-2005 International business

Poul Skov Dahl PhD student University of Southern Denmark

01-06-2004 31-12-2004 Public administration and organization theory

Linus Dahlander PhD student Chalmers University of 01-09-2004 01-06-2005 Organization theory/innovation

5

Technology studiesLone Dirckinck-Holmfeld Professor Aalborg University 01-11-2004 01-03-2005 computer-mediated

communication and learningAnn Erlandsson PhD student Växjö University 01-09-2004 01-07-2005 Human resource mgmt. &

marketing

Anders Forssell Assoc.Professor Uppsala University 01-04-2004 01-07-2004 Organizational change and reform

Espen Gressetvold Assoc.Professor Trondheim Business School 01-06-2004 01-09-2004 Industrial marketing, innovationAs

Ingjaldur Hannibalsson Professor University of Iceland 01-01-2004 01-05-2004 University management

Thomas Heinze PhD student Fraunhofer Institute 01-01-2004 01-06-2004 Systems and innovation research

Per Lægreid Professor University of Bergen 01-08-2004 01-07-2005 Political science

Reijo Miettinen Professor University of Helsinki 01-05-2004 01-07-2004 Organizational change

Johanna Moisander Professor Helsinki School of Economics 01-08-2003 01-04-2004 Sociology of technology

Snjolfur Olafsson Professor University of Iceland 01-10-2004 06-11-2004 Operations managementHans Råmö Asst. Professor Stockholm University 01-07-2004 01-08-2004 Organization theory and marketing

communicationArne Remmen Professor Aalborg University 01-11-2004 01-03-2005 Technology, environment &

societyMaija Renko PhD student Turku University 01-04-2004 01-11-2004 International business

Amir Sasson PhD student Norwegian School of Management

01-04-2004 01-09-2004 Strategic management

6

Helena Stensota Asst. Professor Göteborg University 01-09-2004 01-06-2005 Comparative politics, public Administration, feminism

Senja Svahn PhD student Helsinki School of Economics 01-08-2004 01-01-2005 Management

7

Appendix 2

SCANCOR INSTITUTIONS CONFERENCEMarch 26 – 27, 2004

CERAS Building, Room 204Stanford University

Friday, March 26th:

9 – 9:30: Continental breakfast in Room 204 CERAS

9:30 – 9:40: Introductions

9:40 – 11:30: Session 1: Codebreakers: How do Entrepreneurs Create Opportunities to Remake Conventions?

Rick Delbridge and Tim Edwards (Cardiff Business School):Challenging Conventions: Actors and Roles in Processes of Nonisomorphic

Institutional Change

Patrick Castel (University of Lyon) and Erhard Friedberg (CSO-CNRS, Paris):Institutional Change as an Interactive Process: The Modernization of French

Cancer Centers

Bernard Leca (ESSEC and University of Lille):Changing the Focal: Crafting a Wider Lens to Study Endogenous Institutional

Change as Divergent

Discussants: (one for each paper, after each paper is presented): Huggy Rao (Northwestern University), Dick Scott (Stanford), Woody Powell (Scancor, Stanford)

Provocateur (after papers and comments, to get a general discussion started): Marc Ventresca(UC-Irvine)

11:30 – 1 pm: Boxed Lunch

1 – 3:00: Session 2: Pathways of Institutional Change: The Role of Neo-Liberal Ideologies

Marie-Laure Djelic (ESSEC):The New Kid on the Block – The International Competition Network and How it

Contributes to Institutional Change

Marc Ventresca (University of California, Irvine) and Naomi Olson (Boston College):Another World is Possible, or is It? Social Movement Challenges to the Global

Order as a Provocation to Institutionalist Imageries of Change

8

Tom Beamish and Nicole Biggart (University of California, Davis):Markets as Regimes: Explaining Change and Stability, Competition and Consensus

in Economic Contexts

Discussants: Gilli Drori (Stanford), Sanjeev Khagram (Harvard), Marc Schneiberg(Reed College)

Provocateurs: John Meyer(Stanford)

3:00 – 3:30: Coffee

3:30 – 5:00 Session 3: Work-in-Progress Discussion from Researchers at Stanford (brief 15 minute informal presentations about current research)

W. Richard Scott: Advocacy Organizations and FieldStructuration; global projects

Hokyu Hwang: Planning Development: theState, Globalization, and Shifting Locus of Planning

Gilli Drori: From World Culture to Scientization, through Health and Governance: Searching for the Logics that make the World  Safe for Organization.

Woody Powell: The Circulation of Managerial Ideas in the Bay Area Nonprofits Community

Dinner for out-of-town guests, 6 pm

Saturday, March 27th:

9:30 – 10: Continental breakfast in Room 204, CERAS

10 – 12 pm: Session 4: Competing and Nested Institutional Logics

P.D. Jennings and J.E. Cliff (University of Alberta) and M.L. Martens (Concordia University):

Cops, Robbers, Suspects and Model Citizens: The Institutional Dynamics of Enforcement in a Regulated Field

Trish Reay and Bob Hinings (University of Alberta):Change in Organizational Fields: A study of competing institutional logics

Finn Borum (Copenhagen Business School):The Hospital as a Boundary Institution

Discussants: Lauren Edelman (UC-Berkeley), Nicole Biggart, Erhard Friedberg

Provocateurs: Patricia Thornton (Duke), Dick Scott

12 – 1:30: Lunch, CERAS Lobby

9

10

1:30 – 3:30: Session 5: The Formation and Circulation of Templates

Renate Meyer (Vienna University) Translating shareholder value: Frame alignment and discursive opportunity

structure

Achim Oberg, Tino Schöllhorn (University of Mannheim), Michael Woywode(RWTH, Aachen)Isomorphism in Organizational Self-Representation in the World Wide Web?

Institutionalization Processes Regarding Internet Presentation of Organizations

Gerardo Patriotta (Nottingham University, UK) and Giovan Francesco Lanzara (University of Bologna)The Institutional Construction of a Factory: Inscription and Delegation at Fiat’s

Melfi Plant

Discussants: Huggy Rao, Woody Powell, Finn Borum

Provocateur: Kerstin Sahlin-Andersson (Uppsala University)

3:30 – 4: Coffee

4:00 – 5: Summing Up: Reflections on the quest for an explanation for institutional change

Possible lineup of people to start discussion: Huggy Rao, Marc Schneiberg, Dick Scott, Bob Hinings

5:30 - Dinner/celebration for everyone, 1st floor lobby of the CERAS Building

Format: Each paper presenter should take 15 minutes to present the paper. (We will use use overheads, and not bother with PowerPoint, ok?) Discussants will comment on individual papers and take 5–8 minutes. Provocateurs should take 5-10 minutes to raise broad theoretical reflections.

11

Appendix 3SCANCOR/SSRC Conference:

Corporate Social Presponsibility in the Era of the Transforming Welfare State

May 6 – 8, 2004

CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY IN THE ERA OF THE TRANSFORMING WELFARE STATE

PROGRAM

Thursday May 6th: Dinner at Enoteca Baldovino in Piazza Santa Croce at 8 pm

Friday May 7th

9:00-10 Opening commentsKerstin Sahlin-Anderson, Doug Guthrie

10-1 Session 1: Markets vs or for the public good? Shifting boundaries among states, business corporations and civil societyShanti Avrigan (NYU), Helena Buhr (Uppsala University, Sweden), John Campbell (Dartmouth College), Christina Garsten (Stockholm University, Sweden), Pauline Göthberg (Sodertorn University College, Sweden), Bethany Moreton (Yale University)

1 – 2.15 Lunch

2.15-3.30 Session 2: Forms of Governance in Extractive IndustriesAtle Midttun (BI Norwegian School of Management), Simone Pulver (Brown University), MarinaWelker (University of Michigan)

3.30 -4 Coffee break

4 –6 Session 3: New Forms of RegulationMatt Hirschland (Business for Social Responsibility), Bengt Jacobsson (Sodertorn University College, Sweden), Ulrika Mörth (Stockholm University, Sweden), Sanjeev Khagram (Kennedy School, Harvard)

8:00 Group dinner in Florence

Saturday May 8th 9.30-12 Session 4: CSR: a social movement and a professionalization project

Rakesh Khurana (Harvard Business School), Josh Margolis (Harvard Business School), Mette Morsing (Copenhagen Business School, Denmark), Kerstin Sahlin-Andersson (Uppsala University, Sweden), Karolina Windell (Uppsala University, Sweden)

12-1:15 Lunch

1:30-3 Session 5: Where do the Templates for CSR Come From?Gili Drori (Stanford University), ) Suzanne Shanahan (Duke University), Woody Powell (Stanford University)

12

3-3:30 Coffee break

3:30-5 Session 6: Do Banks Rule the World in CSR too?Jerry Davis (University of Michigan), Doug Guthrie (New York University), Sanjeev Khagram (Kennedy School, Harvard), Bill Boler (Business in the Community)

5-6 Wrap-up

13

Appendix 4Scandinavia at Stanford

Approaches to the Study of Markets and InstitutionsAugust 30 – September 3, 2004

A collaboration between Scandinavian Universities and Scancor

Format: A series of thematically linked workshops with U.S. faculty, advanced graduate students from Scandinavia, and several graduate participants from Stanford and Scancor.

Tasks: Scandinavian participants will do readings in advance, prepare one page summary of their own research projects, and submit three page memos on one of the topics discussed below by the time the session meets.

Location: 527 CERAS Building, Scancor Conference Room, 9:00 am (morning) and 1:30 (afternoon)

Faculty: Diane Bailey, Assistant Professor, Management Science and EngineeringStephen Barley, Professor, Management Science and Engineering

Mark Granovetter, Professor, Department of SociologyDebra Meyerson, Associate Professor of Education and (by courtesy)

Graduate School of Business Nathan Rosenberg, Professor Emeritus, Department of Economics

Walter W. Powell, Director, Scancor, Professor, School of Education, and (by courtesy) Dept. of Sociology and Graduate School of Business Marc Schneiberg, Associate Professor of Sociology, Reed College W. Richard Scott, Professor Emeritus, Department of Sociology

August 30th:

Morning: Introduction of students and their interests (Woody Powell will coordinate)

Afternoon: Economic and Sociological Approaches to Industrial Districts: Silicon Valley and Beyond (Powell)

Jason Owen-Smith and W.W. Powell. 2004. “Knowledge Networks in the Boston Biotechnology Community.” Organizational Science, 15: 5-21.

John Seely Brown and Paul Duguid. 2000. “Mysteries of the Region: Knowledge Dynamics in Silicon Valley” in C-M Lee et al, The Silicon Valley Edge. Stanford University Press.

Tim Bresnahan, Alfonso Gambardella, and Annalee Saxenian. 2001. “Old Economy Inputs for new Economy Outcomes: Cluster Formation in the New Silicon Valleys.” Industrial and Corporate Change, 10 (4): 835-60.

14

Bruce Kogut. 2000. “The Network as Knowledge: Generative Rules and the Emergence of Structure.” Strategic Management Journal, 21: 405-25.August 31st:

Morning: The Sociology of Industry (Mark Granovetter)

Mark Granovetter. 1985. "Economic Action and Social Structure: The Problem of Embeddedness." American Journal of Sociology, 91 (3): 481-510.

Arthur Stinchcombe. 1959. "Bureaucratic and Craft Administration of Production." Administrative Science Quarterly, 4 (2): 481-510. Reprinted in Stinchcombe, Stratification and Organization. Cambridge University Press, 1986.

Paul Hirsch. 1972. "Processing Fads and Fashions." American Journal of Sociology, 77 (4): 639-59.

Annalee Saxenian. 1996. "Inside-Out: Regional Networks and Industrial Adaptation in Silicon Valley and Route 128." Cityscape, 1996 (May):41-60. Afternoon: Building Network Databases (Granovetter and Powell)

September 1st:

Morning: University-Industry Interfaces: U.S. and European Differences (Nate Rosenberg)

Nathan Rosenberg. 2002. “America’s University/Industry Interfaces 1945-2000.” Working paper.

Afternoon: Learning and Knowledge at the Workplace (Diane Bailey)

Wanda Orlikowski. 2002. “Knowing in Practice: Enacting a Collective Capability in Distributed Organizing.” Organization Science, 13 (3): 249-273.

Scott D.N. Cook and John Seeley Brown. 1999. “Bridging Epistemologies: The Generative Dance between Organizational Knowledge and Organizational Knowing.” Organization Science, 10 (4): 381-400.

Diane Bailey, Julie Gainsburg and Lesley Sept. 2004. “Apprentices and Gurus: Two Models of Modern Workplace Learning.” Submitted paper.

September 2nd

Morning: Introduction to Institutional Analysis (Marc Schneiberg, Dick Scott)

15

Lauren Edelman. 1992. “Legal Ambiguity and Symbolic Structures: Organizational Mediation of Civil Rights Law.” American Journal of Sociology, 97 (6): 1531-76.

Andrew Hoffman. 1999. “Institutional Evolution and Change: Environmentalism and the U.S. Chemical Industry.” Academy of Management Journal, 42 (4): 351-71.

W. Richard Scott. 2004. “Competing Logics in Health Care: Professional, State, and Managerial.” Pp. 267-87 in Frank Dobbin, ed., The Sociology of the Economy. Russell Sage Foundation.

Marc Schneiberg and Elisabeth Clemens. 2004. “The Typical Tools for the Job: Research Strategies in Institutional Analysis.” In W.W. Powell and D.L. Jones, eds., How Institutions Change. University of Chicago Press.

Afternoon: Contestation and Change in Organizational Fields (Schneiberg)

Calvin Morrill. 2004. “Institutional Change and Interstitial Emergence: The Growth of Alternative Dispute Resolution in American Law, 1965-95.” In W.W. Powell and D.L. Jones, eds., How Institutions Change. University of Chicago Press.

Marc Schneiberg. 2002. “Organizational Heterogeneity and the Production of New Forms: Politics, Social Movements and Mutual Companies in American Fire Insurance, 1900-1930.” Pp. 39-89 in M. Lounsbury and M.Ventresca, eds., Research in the Sociology of Organizations. JAI Press.

Patricia Thornton and William Ocasio. 1999. “Institutional Logics and the Historical Contingency of Power in Organizations: Executive Succession in the Higher Education Publishing Industry, 1958-1990.” American Journal of Sociology, 105(3): 801-43.

Working dinner: The Publishing Process in Organizations Journals (Steve Barley)

16

September 3rd:

Morning: Organizational Learning (Deb Meyerson)

Amy Edmondson. 2002. “The Local and Variegated Nature of Learning in Organizations: A Group-Level Perspective.” Organization Science, 13(2): 128-146.

James G. March. 1991. “Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning.” Organization Science, 2(1): 71-87.

Anne Miner and Stephen Mezias. 1996. “Ugly Duckling No More: Pasts and Futures of Organizational Learning Research.” Organization Science, 7(1): 88-99.

Afternoon: Studies of the Labor Process (Barley)

Stephen Barley and Stacia Zabusky. 1997. “You Can’t be a Stone if You’re Cement: Reevaluating the Emic Identities of Scientists in Organizations.” Research in Organizational Behavior, 19:361-404.

Stephen Barley. 1996. “Technicians in the Workplace: Ethnographic Evidence for Bringing Work into Organization Studies.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 41: 404-441.

Diane Bailey and Stephen Barley. 2003. “Return to Work: Toward Post-Industrial Engineering.” Submitted paper.

Dinner celebration: 7:30 pm at Mandarin Gourmet restaurant

17

Appendix 5

SCANCOR SEMINARS, 2004

January 12th: Simon Rodan, Assistant Professor Management, San Jose State University More than Network Structure: How Knowledge Heterogeneity Influences Managerial Performance and Innovativeness

This study deals with individual managerial performance, both overall and in generating innovation. While prior work has demonstrated a relationship between network structure and managerial performance, inadequate attention has been paid to network content. We consider several micro-social processes that might account for differences in managerial performance, taken from economic sociology and studies of managers’ exploitation of their social networks and derived from work in psychology on the genesis of ideas. We compare the influence of these mechanisms on managerial performance using a sample of 106 middle managers in a European telecommunications company. Our findings suggest that while network structure matters, access to heterogeneous knowledge is of equal importance for overall managerial performance and of greater importance for innovation performance.

January 26th:  Lauren Edelman, Professor of Law & Society, UC Berkeley; Fellow,      

             Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences.         The Endogeneity of Law: Civil Rights at Work

The realm of law is generally viewed as above and outside of the realm of organizations.  Organizations may resist the force of law or they may embrace it, and they may tweak the meaning of law at the margins, but they are essentially the receivers rather than the producers of legal rules.  Law, on the other hand, is generally viewed as determinative and coercive.  In this typical vision of law and organizations, law is exogenous to organizations; that is, law is formed prior to and relatively autonomously from organizational actors, structures, and institutions.

In this essay, I propose an alternative model of law, which treats the legal and organizational realms as integrally intertwined and mutually constitutive.  My model treats law as endogenous, that is, as taking shape within the social fields that it seeks to regulate. Legal endogeneity is made possible in the civil rights realm because law regulating employment tends to be broad and ambiguous.  Legal ambiguity leaves organizations substantial latitude to construct the meaning of compliance (Edelman 1992).  Understandings of “compliance” with law, and ultimately of the meaning of law itself may be crystallized by the courts but those understandings derive in large part from institutionalized organizational patterns, structures, practices, rituals, and culture.  This essay outlines the process by which organizations interpret, mediate, construct, and ultimately shape the meaning of civil rights law.

By understanding law as endogenous, it becomes possible to understand how and why laws regulating organizations often take unanticipated forms, and why judicial

18

interpretations of those laws often fail to remedy inequality in the workplace.  A theory of endogenous law provides a framework for understanding how and why statutes that regulate organizations have limited impact, and how the courts legitimate and institutionalize forms of compliance that undermine the very legal rights they apparently enforce.  Endogeneity theory is not, however, simply an explanation for the claims made by critical legal scholars regarding the incapacity of law to reform social institutions.  Endogeneity theory also explains how law may produce significant social change in subtle, indirect, and unexpected ways by altering conceptions of what constitutes good management, organizational fairness, and employee rights. 

February 2nd: Lynn Eden, Associate Director/Senior Research Scholar,Center for International Security and Cooperation, Institute for International Studies, Stanford. Knowledge-Creating Government Organizations Getting it Wrong about Nuclear Devastation: Why? (from her book Whole World on Fire)

Whole World on Fire is about a puzzle that is morbid, arcane, and consequential.  Morbid, because it involves the devastation caused by nuclear weapons.  Arcane, because it involves secret and obscure calculations by a government bureaucracy tucked away deep within U.S. military intelligence.  And consequential, because it involves decisions at the highest level of government about using nuclear weapons.

The puzzle begins over a half century ago, in the years immediately following the end of World War II, and it continues to the present: How and why, for more than half a century, has the U.S. government seriously underestimated the damage that nuclear weapons would cause?  How and why did the goverment, in devising its plans to fight strategic nuclear war shortly after World War II, develop detailed knowledge about the blast damage caused by nuclear weapons but fail to develop knowledge about an even more devastating effect?  That effect was mass fire (popularly termed "firestorm"), such as the fire that furned down Hiroshima.

February 9th:  Lee Fleming, Assistant Professor, Harvard Business School. Penguins and other Birds of a Feather: The Emergence of Leaders in Open Technological Communities (With Dave Waguesback)

How did a Finnish hacker become “Leader of the Free World” (not to mention a high tech multi-millionaire, without gainful employment or investment of a single Markka)? More generally, what identifies future leaders of open innovation communities? Consistent with the norms of an engineering culture, we find that future leaders must make strong technical contributions and work with a variety of collaborators.  Contrary to past arguments and mostly cross sectional evidence that brokerage leads to early promotion, our longitudinal analysis of careers within the IETF (Internet Engineering Task Force) community indicates that the most common path to leadership requires both brokerage and sustained commitment to the community.  The results thus indicate a “trusted broker” role within voluntary communities for individuals with technical

19

skills, physical commitment, and a structural position that can bind the community together.

February 23rd:  Brooke Harrington, Assistant Professor of Sociology, Brown University

Dollars and Difference: Values, Diversity and Investment Team Performance

This paper examines the contribution of values to workgroup outcomes. Specifically, it looks at the role of task commitment the intrinsic value individuals place on performing a task to the best of their ability. The study looks at the direct effects of both mean level task commitment and diversity in task commitment, as well as interactions with social category and informational diversity, in shaping workgroup performance and morale. Following recent calls to conduct more demographic research in real-world settings with objective outcome measures, this study draws on a sample of intact, natural working groups whose outcome measures include a bottom line return on investment. The findings suggest that, in terms of performance and morale, there is value in diversity as long as there is little diversity in values. That is, congruence in task commitment brings out the best in social category and informational diversity, creating a diversity premium for team outcomes. In contrast, heterogeneity in task commitment not only has a direct negative effect on workgroup performance, but evokes the destructive aspects of other forms of difference. Such groups are unable to access the resources in social category and informational differences and thus do not benefit from the diversity premium.

March 1st:  Maria Andenfelt, Uppsala UniversityCreating and Sharing Knowledge within a Transnational team - the Development of a Globalbusiness System" (co-authored with Katarina Lagerström)

By means of transnational teams, local knowledge of business units can be leveraged to a global level for the development of common global business solutions in the multinational corporation. We investigate this increasingly valuable means of supporting the creation and sharing of knowledge.  Empirical evidence from a case study of a transnational team identifies socialization of team members as perhaps primary for efficient creation and sharing of knowledge, and information technology as secondary.

March 8th: Sanjeev Khagram, Assistant Professor, Kennedy School, Harvard University. From his book: Dams and Development: Transnational Struggles over Water and Power

This is the concluding chapter of my forthcoming book entitled, "Dams and Development: Transnational Struggles over Water and Power," forthcoming with Cornell University Press. In it, I trace the rise of transnational coalitions and the

20

institutionalization of a transnational issue network constituted by primarily advocacy nongovernmental organizations and social movements from across the world during the last third of the twentieth century, I then analyze the related shifts that have occurred in the what I call the international big dam regime (norms, procedures and decision-making structures shaping dynamics around big dam building around the world). In particular, I focus on changing policies and practices at the World Bank, various states, and transnational corporations, and the constitution of a new experiment in multi-actor, cross-sectoral global governance called the World Commission on Dams. I argue that employing the concepts of transnational organizational sectors, social fields, and structuration processes might offer better analytic tools from which to understanding the phenomena and dynamics examined in this chapter and the book. I also identify several exciting directions for future research - two of them are the focus on my current research and will be the focus on most of my talk - one on the contested transnational field of corporate citizenship and the second on the potential and contentious re-structuring of a transnational social fields through cross-border, cross-level,, multi-actor and cross-sectoral policy networks. The completed book and these two current research projects offer challenging puzzles and opportunities for theoretical innovation in a range of sociological and inter-discipinary areas including organizational and institutional analysis, economic and political sociology, development, organizational strategy, regulation and governance, among others.

March 15th: Werner Rammert, Professor of Sociology and Technology Studies and Director of the Center for Technology and Society,

Technical University Berlin. Institutional fragmentation and heterogeneous networks of innovation - beyond functionalism and systems theory

Scientific and technological knowledge is going to become the key factor in the change of economies and in the evolution of society. The production, distribution and use of knowledge determines the competitive advantages of enterprises (Machlup 1962). It increases the innovative capacities of economies. It strengthens the power position of nation-states in the world-system. As the production of knowledge is dispersed over many places, as it is split into the use of explicit and non-explicit knowledge, and as it is divided between different institutional actors, new means and mechanisms of co-ordination are demanded beyond market and hierarchy. “Interactive networks of innovation” (Lundvall 1993) are constructed in order to get access to local knowledge and to share profit and risk of its global utilization. “Knowledge management” is created as a new field of business in order to raise the efficiency of knowledge work and to keep up with the pace of innovation. “Knowledge politics” is coming up as a new field of policy. Its aim is to establish the adequate institutional infrastructure that assures and accelerates the growth of knowledge production. If one shifts the focus from the division of labor that predominated in industrial society to the division of knowledge (Hayek 1945; Helmstädter 2000) that takes place actually, one can observe and perhaps explain the emergence of a new regime of governance. I shall call it the regime of distributed knowledge production.

21

The title of the paper „The governance of knowledge, limited“ indicates two features of the actual mode of knowledge production: On the one side, the knowledge production has turned into a business. Universities and research institutes are transforming themselves into patent-holding and knowledge-selling enterprises. Firms and companies engage themselves in the business of knowledge creation and knowledge management. Scientific institutions, state agencies and industrial R&D-laboratories are knitted together to build either national innovation systems (Nelson 1993) or networks of innovation that operate between heterogeneous actors and on an international level (Freeman 1991; Powell/Koput/Smith-Doerr 1996). Their activities are co-ordinated more and more under the imperatives of economic innovation and national wealth (Foray/Freeman 1993). The first aim of this paper is to give a short outline of the institutional changes that are leading to a new regime of distributed knowledge production.

On the other side, limitations of the governance of knowledge become visible. They are rooted mainly in two paradoxical processes. Firstly, the heterogeneity of the enrolled actors  scientists and managers, politicians and administrators, venture capitalists and ecological activists - and the diversity of their perspectives cause problems of a successful concertation (Rammert 2000) that does not level out the creative differences between disciplines or institutional rationality standards, and that does not destroy the complementary competences of functionally specialized actors. Secondly, the specifity of knowledge to be an intangible asset and an incompletely explicable set of competences sets limits to the complete control and commercialization of knowledge. The second aim of this paper is to explore the role of non-explicit knowledge in the process of making a growing part of the knowledge more explicit.

The innovativeness and the economic performance of the rising science-based “knowledge societies“ (Böhme/Stehr 1986) are fundamentally determined by the ways how they cope with both problems, the institutional problem of co-ordinated distributedness between heterogeneous actors and the epistemological paradox of the explication of the non-explicit knowledge.

March 29th:  Chiqui Ramirez, Professor, School of Education, Stanford            World Society and the Socially Embedded University

Much of the literature on universities emphasizes the importance of the national context in shaping its institutional goals and organizational forms.  Within this literature differences in how universities react to university industry ties reflect differences in historical legacies. From this scholarly tradition the more optimistic American and the more guarded Western European sensibilities to university industry ties correspond to differences in historical legacies.  In formal organizational terms these historical legacies constitute the organizational decisions and structures, which add up to the path dependencies, which in turn explain persistent differences across national contexts.  Within this tradition the weight of historical legacies is paramount in explaining university trajectories across national contexts.  An alternative perspective focuses on the world context and emphasizes the degree to which nation-states and world models of progress and justice have influenced national educational institutions. From a world society perspective one expects to find growing educational commonalities across

22

nation-states.  In organizational parlance one expects growing institutional isomorphism, as different universities increasingly experience common rationalizing influences from a common organizational field.

April 5th:  Evan Schofer, Asst. Professor of Sociology, University of MinnesotaThe Effects of World Society on Environmental Protection Outcomes: The Consequences of International Institutions

The rise of a world environmental regime has encouraged nations to adopt new environmental policies and laws worldwide.  But, scholars question the impact on the environment, suggesting that national laws may be ‘ceremonial’ and ‘decoupled’ from outcomes.  We fill a gap in neo-institutional theory by specifying the circumstances in which institutional pressures will affect outcomes  namely, when institutional environments are: 1) highly structured; 2) when they penetrate down into actors and their sub-units; and 3) when they are persistent over time.  All three conditions apply to the world environmental regime.  We turn to empirical analyses of environmental degradation to answer the question:  Do global environmental norms and pressures lead to improved outcomes?  Longitudinal analyses find that the growth of the world environmental regime (measured in terms of structure, penetration, and persistence) is associated with lower levels of environmental degradation (as measured by global CO2 and CFC production).  Also, nations with more links to global environmentalism experience less degradation (as measured by national deforestation and CO2 production).  In this case, international institutions generate substantive social change.

April 12th:  Chris Ansell, Associate Professor, Political Science, UC-Berkeley Collaborative Governance in Theory and Practice

In the last two decades, a new model of governance has emerged known as collaborative governance.   This mode of governance brings multiple stakeholders together in a common forum for consensus decision-making and is often led by public agencies.   In this paper, I begin the process of a meta-analytical study of a sprawling literature on collaborative governance, with the goal of identifying some of the general factors that either facilitate or constrain attempts at collaborative governance.  The ultimate goal - though not achieved in this paper - is to develop a contingency approach to collaboration that highlights the conditions under which collaborative governance will be more or less effective as an approach to policy making and public management.

April 19th:  Marc Schneiberg, Associate Professor of Sociology, Reed College Varieties in Capitalism, Varieties of Assocation: Collaborative Learning Systems in American Industry, 1900-1925

Between 1900 and 1925, the American economy witnessed a remarkably successful effort to restructure and upgrade competition through associations. Unlike the prevailing interpretation of American industrialization, in which associations fell prey to antitrust and intractable collective action problems, we find that associations in many industries reinvented themselves after the great merger wave, making a transition from price cartels to developmental associations.  This transition marked two previously

23

unrecognized varieties in economic institutions.  In the first, we find vibrant associations, which institutionalized collaborative alternatives to mass production, in the midst of an economy typically thought dominated by markets and corporate hierarchies.  In the second, we find associations as collaborative learning systems, which used deliberation, cost accounting, and benchmarking to foster new forms of competition based on innovation and productivity improvement. This article explains the origins of developmental associations, outlines their principles, traces their implementation in the commercial printing industry, and surveys their distribution and performance effects across 344 American industries. Based on these findings, we revise conventional institutionalist assumptions about order and agency to make room for institutional diversity and actors’ capacities for reflexivity and learning.

April 26th:  David Obstfeld, Assistant Professor of Management, University of California -Irvine Engineering Knowledge: Innovation and Knowledge Creation as Social Movement

Social movement theory is employed as a means to illuminate the political dimension of knowledge creation and innovation.  Knowledge articulation, or the social process by which knowledge is made more explicit and usable, is presented as the primary engine of knowledge creation in organizational contexts.  Field observations of an automotive design process reveal the essentially political nature of knowledge articulation -- successful knowledge articulation involves not only the generation of shared understanding but persuasion and enlistment.  The practice of framing, as depicted in social movement theory, is presented as a subset of articulation that further specifies this persuasive dimension of knowledge creation work.  A further application of the social movement framework suggests that knowledge creation, in order to be successful, also relies on action repertoires, mobilizing resources, and conducive political opportunity structures.  Knowledge creation is presented as the mobilization of action to subvert existing systems as well as a collective knowledge building activity.

Key Words: Knowledge creation, innovation, social movement theory.

May 10th:   Jozef Bátora, Scancor and University of Oslo         The Organizational Basis of Diplomacy:

Its Emergence, Characteristics and Change

Diplomacy as a regularized process of negotiation between entities has been a feature present in the relations between human collectives ever since first such entities started to communicate (Berridge [1995] 2002, Hamilton and Langhorne 1995). Yet diplomacy as a set of rules, norms and procedures regulating relations between states started to emerge gradually first along with the formation of the Westphalian state order, it has become one of its central features (Held et al 1999:39). As I have argued elsewhere (Bátora 2003), with the rise of sovereign states, diplomacy has emerged as an institution or a set of rules and routines that define appropriate actions of states in the international environment in terms of relations between their roles as states and situations. The norms, rules and routines are embedded in organizational arrangements through which

24

states conduct their diplomatic relations. While prior to the rise of the state system, diplomacy was organized on a number of local, parochial, irregular and temporary organizational platforms, the current organizational basis of diplomacy comprised of foreign ministries and their embassies was formed following the rise of the sovereign state, which was guided by a twofold set of processes.

First, there was the adaptation of state structures to the rise of other state structures. Over time this development led to a) gradual standardization and diffusion of diplomatic rules, norms and procedures related mainly to the rise of permanent embassies in foreign capitals, and b) to the emergence of groups of officials devoted (at first not exclusively) to the conduct of diplomatic relations. Their involvement in a common enterprise of diplomacy and their shared ethos and values related to their mostly aristocratic origin facilitated the rise of a transnational professional community of diplomats with its peculiar norms, rules and status hierarchies, which until today characterize national foreign services. 

Second, the rise of the modern state was marked by a set of processes inside each of the states including centralization and later bureaucratization. Centralization of state authority led to aggregation of responsibility for foreign relations of the state in one center. The rising volume and complexity of relations with other states, as well as the increase in communication from and to diplomats representing the state abroad eventually led to creation of specialized organizations charged with coordination and administration of foreign affairs at the central state level  the foreign ministries. To begin with, these organizations were strongly infused by the norms and working procedures of the professional diplomatic community as they were first and foremost the administrative support mechanism for the body of diplomats representing the state abroad. Hence, although some of these organizations did feature administrative procedures and mechanisms with strong resemblance of modern bureaucracies as early as 17th Century, they were diplomatic administrations but no Weberian bureaucracies. This began to change in the second half of the 19th Century when due to several societal factors bureaucracy in the Weberian sense started to penetrate structures of national governments. Bureaucratization of the foreign affairs machinery had a twofold effect. On the one hand it delineated and stabilized foreign affairs as a specific area of state administration. On the other hand, it also meant that foreign services were exposed to standardizing pressures aimed at streamlining their structures and working procedures so as to be coherent with the bureaucratic structures and procedures of the rest of the respective national government and liable for democratic control by parliamentary bodies. Diplomats hence acquired an additional professional identity as members of the civil service of their government and foreign ministries gradually became more firmly embedded within national central state administrations.

May 17th:  Al Bergesen, Professor of Sociology, University of Arizona         The Islamist Ethic and the Spirit of Terrorism

Weber noted the geo-correlation of rational capitalist behavior and radical Protestantism, and so do I note the geo-correlation between jihadist terrorism and radical Islam. Weber's question: where the two linked? Were religious ethics linked to practical economic behavior, and mine: are religious ethics linked to violent political

25

behavior? That is, can fundamentalist religious ethics spur not only a special kind of behavior in the economic realm, but can it also spur a special kind of violence in the political relam? Does Weber work for Islam and violence? My suspicion is yes.

May 24th:  Anne Kovalainen, Professor, Turku School of Economics and Business Administration         Rethinking the Revival of Social Capital and Trust in Social Theory: Aspects of Gender Analysis

The talk will focus on two specific aspects of contemporary social theory where the apparent non-existence of gender in the theoretical corpus will be discussed. Social capital and trust have within a short time become hugely influential, truly global theoretical concepts in the analyses of current social and economic development, change and cohesion in various societies. While the term ‘social capital’ features in much scholarly and interdisciplinary discourse, it also has parallels with political agendas, large-scale social and economic development and, in particular, social policy development. The assumption of a positive relationship between democracy, participation, and social capital and trust prevails in much of the research literature. This seems to build their appeal also in business studies and in organization studies. Both concepts build e.g. on networks and interactions between individuals in institutional and organisational contexts.

Have the new conceptual schemes of social capital and trust been able to extract the masculinity from sociological agency, or is the concept of agency that in the newly rediscovered ideas of social capital and trust still predominantly masculine, as remains the case with much sociological theorising? Is this also the case in economics, which has had a substantial influence on sociological discussions of social capital theory (Coleman 1990; Dasgupta 2000; Solow 2000)? The uneasy relationship between sociological theorising and feminism has manifested itself in many ways in sociological research and analyses. While feminist analysis of social theory in general has worked to unsettle rigid and established categories and concepts, ranging from class stratification to identity theories, most mainstream sociological theorising still ignores the questions posed by considerations of gender. I will discuss the reasons as to why social capital theory has been immune to a rethinking of the androcentric concept of agency. Rather, it has reinforced the kind of social theory where gender is disentangled and invisible, and yet written into the theory in various ways. I delineate where feminist analysis might be possible and where it would make a difference in the theoretical corpus of social capital.

Summer Break

October 4th: Paula England, Professor of Sociology, Stanford Does Bad Pay Cause Occupations to Feminize, Does Feminization Reduce Pay, and How Can we Tell with Longitiudinal Data?" (with Paul Allison, Yuxiao Wu, and Mary Ross)

Predominantly female occupations pay less than “male” jobs, even after adjusting for skill demands.  The devaluation perspective sees sex composition to affect wages; it says that gender bias affects employers’ decisions about the relative pay of “male” and

26

“female” jobs.  The queuing or relative-attractiveness view sees occupations’ sex composition to be affected by their reward level, with less attractive jobs going to women because employers prefer men and can get them in jobs that pay well.  Longitudinal research on how changes in occupations’ pay relate to changes in their sex composition has employed the cross-lagged panel (lagged-Y-regressor) model, generally finding support for only the devaluation view.  We argue that a stronger statistical approach to assessing causal dynamics is a fixed-effects model with lagged independent variables.  Using CPS data from 1983 to 2001, we test these two perspectives.  We find support for neither idea.  That is, generally, the feminization of occupations does not lower their wages, and a fall in occupations’ relative wages does not lead to feminization.  We speculate that  in earlier historical processes, as occupations and organizations originated, there was a causal relationship between pay and sex composition, but that the continuing relationship is due to institutional inertia freezing in that early relationship, rather than to ongoing causal dynamics.

October 11th: Sanjeev Khagram, Assistant Professor, Kennedy School of Government, Harvard

Towards A Sociology of Transnatinonalism and a Transnational Sociology

Each day, the news vividly depicts how social life crosses, alters, transcends and even transforms borders and boundaries. The destruction of the World Trade on September 11, 2001, one of the most potent symbols of cross-border western capitalism, by members of the Al Qaeda terrorist network is perhaps the most powerful example of the “transnational” nature of the world.  

These ostensibly novel transnational phenomena and dynamics have clear historical analogues and antecedents. Indeed, human social formations and processes have always been transborder and transboundary to a significant degree. Even contemporary nation-states and the nation-state system have been transnationally constituted and shaped over time and space in powerful ways.

These forms and processes of transnationality are the focus of a burgeoning yet fragmented body of scholarship particularly across sub-fields of sociology -- from political, economic, cultural and organizational sociology to the study of gender, race and ethnicity, migration, social movements, demography, etc. -- and closely related social science disciplines.  But scholars who produce this work generally treat their efforts as unconnected to each other and work on them separately. 

There is thus both tremendous value in and potential for constructing a sociology of transnationalism.  In this paper, we develop seven intellectual foundations for such a transnational sociology.   They offer a heuristically rich and compelling set of empirical, methodological, theoretical, philosophical, and normative ideas and options for scholarship on a range of sociological concerns such as power, production, inequality, culture, identity, citizenship, organization and governance.

27

October 18th:  Per Lægreid, Professor of Political Science, University of Bergen   Regulatory Agencies: The Challenge of Balancing Agency Autonomy and Political Control

In this paper we focus on the dynamic interplay between increase in autonomy of regulatory agencies and political control of those agencies. The general research issues are the weak empirical foundations of regulatory reforms, the complex trade-off between political control and agency autonomy, the dual process of de-regulation and re-regulation, the problems of role-specialization and co-ordination, and the questions of “smart practice” in regulatory policy and practice. The theoretical basis is agency theories and a broad institutional approach that blend national political strategies, historical-cultural context and external pressures to understand regulatory agencies and regulatory reform. This approach is contrasted with a practitioner model of agencies. Empirically the paper is based on regulatory reform in Norway, giving a brief introduction to the reform and agency context followed by an analysis of the radical regulatory reform policy introduced recently by the current Norwegian government. We illustrate how regulatory reforms and agencies work in practice by focusing on two specific cases.

 October 25th:  Kjersten Bunker Whittington, PhD student, Sociology, Stanford            Spillovers Versus Embeddedness: The Contingent Effects of Propinquity and Social Structure (with Jason Owen-Smith and W.W. Powell)

Studies of technical innovation within high-technology regions traditionally draw upon one of two perspectives.  Economic sociologists stress the importance of networks for structuring and enhancing innovative activity, while economic geographers emphasize proximity as an important source of the scale effects and information spillovers that drive regional agglomeration.  We integrate and expand these compatible, yet largely separate, approaches.  Regions depend heavily on relational communities that arise from long-term, reciprocal linkages among co-located organizations, while the physical proximity of partners in a relationship alters the nature of information and resource flows.  We consider the joint effects of propinquity and position on firm innovation using negative binomial count models of patenting activity for a sample of life science firms across a 12 year time period (1988-1999).  Regional agglomeration and network effects provide complementary, but contingent, influences on organizational innovation. Network effects persist both independently and inter-dependently with the strength of geographic variables, and regional characteristics drive variation in the degree to which centrality enhances innovation.  We also discuss mechanisms that lead to key contingencies in firm networks, and distinguish between local and cosmopolitan orientations.  We find evidence that local and global ties require substitutable strategies for innovation, while the combination of both decreases returns to innovation.  

28

November 1st:  Henrik Bruun, Senior Scientist, Helsinki Institute of Science and Technology Studies         Distributed Problem Solving in Science and Technology: The Case of a Control Systems Development Project

This paper analyzes the distribution and integration of cognition in a small control system development project called AGRIX. The activity of bringing together socially distributed knowledge is called knowledge networking. We distinguish between three modes of knowledge networkingmodular, translational and pioneerand argue that the project team’s task-specific selection of knowledge networking mode is dependent on the nature of the problem to be solved. Our hypothesis is that knowledge networking responses to well-defined problems will differ from responses to ill-defined problems. We found that the AGRIX project tended to respond to well-defined problems in modular and translational ways and to ill-defined problems in a pioneer way. This suggests that our hypothesis is plausible and thus deserves more systematic investigation. At a more general level, we argue that the perspective of distributed cognition is an important supplement to existing approaches to science and technology studies. We conclude the paper with an agenda for further research on the factors that affect knowledge networking in distributed problem solving. KEY WORDS: Problem solving, distributed cognition, knowledge networking, collaboration, interdisciplinary communication, team, group dynamics, software development, automation November 8th:  Hokyu Hwang, Post-doctoral fellow, Stanford Project in Emerging

Nonprofits, Graduate School of Business, Stanford The Rise and Fall of State Development Planning: An Event History Analysis of National Development Plan Adoptions, 1945-1995

I analyze the rise and fall of state planning in the second half of the 20th century.  Decolonizaton and the institutionalization of the nation-state system in the post-World War II period legitimated the nation-state as the main unit of social, economic, and political integration and the state as its primary agent. In this context, state planning became the dominant model of development as it was actively promoted by advanced industrial countries and international organizations. However, this model has been in rapid decline since the 1970s. First, I expand the scope of the developmental state by defining it as the state’s subscription to a particular conception of development in which the charismatic, planning state is celebrated as the primary agent and driving force in pursuit of national development. Second, I show that this phenomenon was global in scopea striking fact in itself that escapes most studies on the state and development. Finally, by analyzing a cross-national dataset on national development plan adoptions between 1945 and 1995, I examine the factors affecting the global rise and decline of this particular model of development.

29

November 15th: Dick Scott, Professor of Sociology, Emeritus The Evolving Professions: An Institutional Field Approach

The conceptions and arguments we use to discuss the professions change over time as does the character and composition of these occupations.  I briefly review the functionalist and conflict perspectives and then propose an emerging institutionalist conception as an attractive alternative.

I argue that the professions act primarily as institutional agents, crafting cultural-cognitive, normative and regulatory frameworks to reduce uncertainty and aid sense-making and social order.  I conclude by reviewing important changes--both endogenous and exogenous--affecting the nature of professions in modern society. 

November 22nd:  Kathy Eisenhardt, Professor, Management Science & Engineering          Constructing Markets and Organizing Boundaries: Identity, Alliance, and Acquisition as Tools of Power (with Filipe Santos)

This study explores how strategic complexity is related to firm performance in highly dynamic environments.  Consistent with an emerging complexity theory of strategy, we find that strategic complexity has an inverted U-shaped relationship with performance.  Also, as market dynamism increases the complexity of the optimal strategy decreases.  The flexibility engendered by simple rules is increasingly important for high performance as market dynamism increases.  The study extends the emerging theory by dissecting market dynamism into four dimensions - namely, velocity, complexity, ambiguity, and entropy - each with a qualitatively different effect on performance.  Environmental velocity increases the performance of firms using simple rules, environmental complexity decreases performance, and environmental ambiguity blurs the performance distinctions between simple and complex rules.  Market entropy - the degree of disorder and unpredictability in the structure of opportunities - is found to be the key dimension responsible for the necessity of simple strategies for driving high performance in dynamic markets.  This study also points to the need for increased strategic discrimination in dynamic markets as an implication of the skew-shaped performance curve and frequent mistakes results in this study.   Finally, we develop implications for the study of rules and routines in strategy, organization theory, and complexity theory. November 29th:   Gili Drori, International Relations and

International Policy Studies, Stanford            Governed by Governance: The Institutionalization of

Governance as a Prism for Organizational Change

Over and above recent concerns with the global reaches of corporate misconduct, corruption has long been a worldwide concern and its curbing as long been a social policy that is subject to globalization.  Indeed, governance emerges as a solid global field of action: today, governance-related activities are coordinated, as well as initiated, by a web of transnational organizations and national agencies. Currently, transnational organizations, from The World Bank to Transparency International to The World Trade

30

Organization, propagate the advancement of transparency, accountability, and the rule of law in countries and markets worldwide.  Still, what are the notions of governance that are advanced by the work of these transnational organizations?  When did these notions consolidate into the now active global action field of governance? And, who are the social actors behind the institutionalization of governance as a global social concern?  These questions are the heart of this paper.

With development economists and political scientists leading the work on governance reform, the emphasis of current scholarship is on the need for such governance reforms for the smoothening of economic build-up and transactions worldwide.  Because of this rational and purposive focus, such scholarly work fails to explain why most of the recent reforms to expand the rule of law and to curb corruption occur in countries where such social aliments are not a particularly pressing issue, even if their development is lagging.  Other than a few contributions, most notably the work of Peter Evans, the field of governance studies has benefited little from sociological insights, particularly those emphasizing the rationalized, constituted, and global nature of these social reforms. My research agenda is, then, to explore several dimensions of the global institutionalization of governance and to add an institutional perspective to the current scholarship on the issue.  Specifically, I describe the institutionalization and globalization of governance as an expression of rationalized social reform; and, with organizations becoming prime social actors, the rationalized form of governance reform is sweeping for-profit and not-for-profit organizations world-over. December 6th:  Fred Turner, Asst. Professor of Communication, Stanford            Where the Counterculture Met the New Economy: Revisiting the WELL and the Origins of Virtual Community

Over the last ten years, scholars have largely ascribed the rise of “virtual community” to the widespread adoption of computer networking technologies. This paper examines the history of the system on which the term “virtual community” was first used, the Whole Earth ‘Lectronic Link (or WELL), and shows that as both an idea and a social formation, virtual community in fact emerged at the intersection of three forces: the appearance of public computer networks, the persistence of countercultural social ideals from the 1960s, and a shift toward networked forms of economic activity. In the process, the paper brings together analytical frameworks from organizational sociology, American cultural history, and science and technology studies in order to illuminate the complex ways in which technological, social and cultural forms co-evolve.

31

Appendix 6

SCANCOR Visiting Scholar Reports, 2004

Maria Adenfelt, Department of Business Studies, Uppsala UniversityDuring my stay at Scancor from January to October 2004, my activities comprised of (1) working on and finalizing work-in-progress pieces, (2) attending seminars and courses, (3) starting up a new research project “Performance of multinational projects” (joint effort with Katarina Lagerström).

During my stay at Scancor I concluded two book chapters; “Seize the opportunities of being multinational: a study of organizational rejuvenation, relationships and knowledge”, forthcoming chapter in Ghauri, P., Hadjikani, A., & Johanson, J. (eds) Opportunity Development and Networks. The second paper is “Headquarters recognition and corporate relationships in MNCs – intra-corporate transfer of subsidiary competence, in Hadjikani, A. and Lee, J-W (eds) International Markets and business networks. I revised the article “Knowledge exploitation in MNCs – using Centers of Excellence and transnational teams and submitted it to International Business Review. Another article, “Enabling knowledge creation and sharing in transnational projects” (submitted to International Journal of Project management) was initiated - as a result of inspiring comments at my presentation at the Scancor seminar in March - and finished. The article “Rejuvenating for knowledge flows: exploring corporate entrepreneurship in an MNE” submitted to Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice is another product of my stay at Scancor. I initiated the paper “Organizational means, subsidiary knowledge and corporate knowledge development” and that paper is now accepted at EGOS 2005.

I participated in seminars at the School of Engineering: Science & Technology Ventures Program, and the Work, Technology & Organizations group. Occasionally, I have joined the Organizational Behavior seminars at the Business school. On Mondays, the lunch seminars with James G. March and the formal seminars at Scancor have also served as sources of inspiration in my work. In the Spring quarter, I audited the course “Multivariate Data analysis” (Prof. Lattin).

As a part of the research project Performance of multinational projects, I started to work on a survey, and presented a first draft at an informal seminar in October.

Sarah Kirkeby Almbjerg, Copenhagen Business SchoolI was a visiting scholar at SCANCOR for the first three months of 2004. During my stay, my work was focused on two main tasks:

First I was refining my dissertation proposal. When coming to SCANCOR I was approximately six months into my third year of my PhD and expected to deliver and present my dissertation proposal when returning to Denmark. The activities at SCANCOR and Stanford in general added extraordinary value to this work. During informal seminars, lunches, and social activities, I had many great opportunities to discuss the perspectives in my proposal with other SCANCOR scholars, as well as Woody Powell and other attending senior researchers. Further, I benefited from SCANCOR providing me the opportunity to present work in progress at various

32

informal seminars and to get feedback from Stanford faculty such as W. Richard Scott. All of these activities inspired me with new perspectives for my dissertation proposal, which I successfully presented upon returning to my home institution.

Secondly, I had the pleasure of attending courses during my stay. I participated along similar lines as US graduate students in Prof. Walter W. Powell’s PhD course on organization theory. I can safely say that this is the PhD course in which I have learned the most. The thorough overview of the development of organizational theoretical history, presenting main theoretical models and perspectives, has clearly improved my understanding and knowledge of the organizational field, as well as my scholar skills. I have used the gains from this course almost daily during my activities of research, teaching, and so forth. I also attended an undergraduate course on Social Network Analysis at Stanford. I was very impressed with the high level of undergraduate courses and gained new skills within the quantitative perspectives of SNA, an area I had not been exposed to earlier.

Enrico Baraldi, Department of Business Studies, Uppsala UniversityI spent 11 intensive and exciting months at SCANCOR, from February 2004. During this period I both worked on pre-existing research projects and started new ones. As for my ongoing projects, SCANCOR turned out to be a great place for me to work on a few book chapters and a larger anthology titled Taking Place: Locating Science, Technology and Business Studies, which I am editing together with H. Fors & A. Houltz. The book chapters I worked on include, for instance, Organizing Interfaces: IKEA’s Development Journey to Defend the Price of the Table Lack (with A. Waluszewski and due to appear in a forthcoming book edited by Håkansson & Waluszewski) and The Places of IKEA: Using Space in Handling Resource Networks (due to appear in the above anthology).

But the most exciting part of my stay at SCANCOR concerns the start of my post-doctoral project on the development and utilization of biotechnology – a series of in-depth case studies about technologies connected to both Uppsala and the US/San Francisco Bay Area. SCANCOR was a perfect base from which I could perform an extensive data collection (over 70 interviews), both in the Bay Area and in other US regions. Next to this privileged access to direct empirical sources, this new project of mine has also greatly benefited from interesting discussions with all SCANCOR colleagues and with many other people at Stanford.

During these 11 months I also finalized the first work derived from my post-doc project, that is, a chapter titled Combining Scientific Knowledge and Venture Capital across Places and Networks of Resources, written with T. Wedin and due to appear in the above anthology that I am co-editing. This chapter is dedicated to one of the four biotech tools that I am investigating, a toolkit to analyse genetic variation developed “between” Uppsala and Stanford. But the project is still ongoing and the part of concerning a specific biotech tool called micro-array will be performed in cooperation with Linus Dahlander and Henrik Bruun, two of the SCANCOR scholars that I met during my stay.

In summary, SCANCOR offered me an excellent opportunity not only to gain direct access to empirical material fundamental for my newest research project, but also to

33

interact with great researchers from different disciplines. I could do this through workshops (SCANCOR Institutions Conference of March 2004 was a major event!), seminars (too many to mention all!) and more informal channels (coffee collaboration).

Jozef Bátora, University of Oslo, Norway During the last six months of my stay at SCANCOR (January-June 2004), I have worked on a number of projects:

1) I continued working on my PhD dissertation on foreign affairs administration in the information age. I developed a background chapter on the emergence of the global organizational basis of diplomacy. In this process, the Stanford libraries proved to be a wonderful resource base, where I could find rare editions of books. I presented the chapter at the Scancor-seminar on May 10, 2004.

2) I actively participated in 2 PhD courses led by Scancor director Walter Powell: a) Seminar on Organization Theory and b) Seminar on Institutional Analysis. The courses provided me with an opportunity to deepen my overall understanding of organizational and institutional theory, and I have been able to make good use of what I have learned in developing the theoretical framework of my PhD dissertation.

3) I wrote 2 articles on the institutional dynamics of Slovakia’s foreign affairs apparatus that were published in Slovak foreign policy journals later in 2004. My article “Does the European Union transform the institution of diplomacy?” finalized during the first 5 months of my stay was accepted for publication by Journal of European Public Policy in May 2004 (published in February 2005).

4) I co-organized (with Thomas Heinze) the roundtable “The Axioms of Organization Theory” held at Scancor in January 2004, featuring interventions by Woody Powell, Jim March, Marc Ventresca and fellow Scancor-scholars.

5) I regularly participated on the “Monday Munch” brown-bag seminar led by James G. March. These seminars were the site of useful testing of new-born ideas. I also attended various other seminars available throughout the campus.

Overall, a stay at Scancor is a fantastic opportunity. It is an access point to the “kitchen” of organization theory that Stanford and its various institutions currently represents. The possibility to interact with scholars like Jim March, Dick Scott, Woody Powell and others around the campus is unique. Furthermore, Scancor provides a venue where scholars from Scandinavia can meet outside their daily contexts.

Ivar Bleiklie, Department of Administration and Organization Theory, University of Bergen/Rokkan Centre for Social Studies, NorwayDuring the second half of my stay at Scancor (the academic year 2003-2004), I worked on a number of different projects: I did the final stages of preparing a special issue of Higher Education with Woody Powell based on papers from a conference at Scancor, April 25-26, 2003 on “Universities and the Production of Knowledge.” The special issue was published in the winter 2005 as vol. 49, no. 1-2.

34

Secondly, I worked with Professor Mary Henkel, Brunel University, UK, on an edited volume, titled Governing Knowledge, published by Springer honoring the work of Professor Maurice Kogan. The contributors address three broad, tightly related issues related to continuity and change in higher education: governance, knowledge and values. The contributors constitute a group of internationally prominent higher education researchers from North America, Europe and Australia such as: Tony Becher, John Brennan, Jürgen Enders, Patricia Gumport, Craig McInnis, Christine Musselin, Sharon Parry, Gary Rhoades and Ulrich Teichler.

Thirdly, I started writing a draft theory chapter for comparative case study of reforms aiming at improving student access and success at three different universities in Norway and South Africa. The draft chapter was presented at a meeting in Cape Town, South Africa in February 2004.

Finally, I prepared a paper on “Diversification of higher education systems”, for the Second Regional Scientific Committee Meeting for Europe and North America of the UNESCO Forum on Higher Education, Knowledge and Research in Paris, 10-11 March 2004.

While at Scancor I continued to enjoy the unique atmosphere of openness and intellectual exchange that characterizes the center and the many opportunities it offers, through seminars and informal meetings, for contacts and exchange with the wider Stanford community. Among such opportunities are the regular Scancor seminars and the informal Scholar seminar series.

Karin Brunsson, Allmänna Ord, Järfälla, SwedenDuring my stay at SCANCOR I finished my book on Management – about measurement, power and people (translated into English). This book will be in print by April, 2005.

I also started on a new project – a book on prescriptive management. I used my stay at SCANCOR to try to sort out the field and my own interest in greater detail. I profited from the excellent libraries at Stanford University and enjoyed the many seminars very much.

Henrik Bruun, Helsinki Institute of Science and Technology StudiesI arrived at SCANCOR in August 2004 with a contract for a one year stay. During the 2004 part of this period, I worked on the following projects. First, I co-authored a paper on Distributed Problem Solving in Science and Technology: The Case of an Automation System Development Project. The paper was presented and discussed at a SCANCOR seminar, and a revised version was submitted to the journal Social Studies of Science. Second, I headed my research group in the implementation of a study of the Academy of Finland and its practices for supporting interdisciplinary research. Third, I finalized two papers which had been accepted for publication in Issues of Integrative Studies and the International Journal of Learning and Change, respectively. Fourth, I participated in the planning and writing of a number of applications for new research funding. And fifth, I was appointed a Chief Editor for Science Studies, an interdisciplinary journal for science and technology studies. This caused some extra

35

work already in 2004. I also participated in the weekly SCANCOR seminars, the internal seminars for SCANCOR scholars, Walter Powell's lab seminar series, and most of the brown bag lunch seminars organized by the Center for Work, Technology and Organization. I have benefited much from being in the stimulating environment of SCANCOR and Stanford University.

Helena Buhr, Uppsala UniversityThe first months of my stay at Scancor (September 2004 and onwards) was mainly a time of work with my dissertation. Stanford has been an excellent environment for reflecting on my empirical data and refining the research question. In the fall quarter, I attended Woody Powell’s seminar on Organization Theory and the Comparative Workshop with Professors John Meyer and Francisco Ramirez. I have also benefited from a number of other seminars, including Scancor’s Monday seminar, the informal Scancor seminar, and the Monday lunch seminar with Jim March. The atmosphere in the seminars and the discussions have both been inspiring and helpful to me in developing my own work.

Karina Skovvang Christensen, Aarhus UniversityI worked primarily on my second paper for my Ph.D. thesis: "Enabling Intrapreneurship: the case of a knowledge intensive industrial company”, which I had the pleasure to present at an internal Scancor seminar. Further, I was pleased to discuss my research with Jim March, Marc Ventresca and colleagues at Scancor. I enjoyed participating in seminars at the School of Engineering: Science & Technology Venture Programme and the Work, Technology & Organizations group, and various lunch seminars.

Francesco Ciabuschi, Department of Business Studies, Uppsala University, SwedenI first came to SCANCOR on the 1st of November 2004, after defending my PhD thesis in International Business titled “On the Innovative MNC. Leveraging Innovations and the Role of IT Systems” at Uppsala University. During my first two months as Visiting Scholar I had the chance to dive into research fields which were quite new to me back then. By attending the many interestingseminars I was also stimulated in the process of developing a new personal project proposal within the frame of the Uppsala STS.

Moreover, I have edited and re-submitted an article of mine, which is now forthcoming: Ciabuschi, F. (2005). “On IT systems and knowledge sharing in MNCs. A Lesson from Siemens AG”, Knowledge Management Research and Practice.

I did also some reviews of papers connected to a book project (“Taking Place: Locating Science, Technology and Business Studies”), which I have been involved with since the beginning of 2004. Lastly,I have been writing on a new paper co-authored with M. Persson, titled “Innovation Transfer in Multinationals. The Impact of IT Infrastructure and Process Dynamics on Innovation Transfer Performance”.

During these first two months I was really impressed by the effervescent academic environment I found at Stanford and by the ease of relating and openly exchanging of ideas with the colleagues at SCANCOR. Particularly, I enjoyed very much the large

36

number of discussions and educational moments both through seminars (especially the SCANCOR Monday’s seminars) and special events.

Poul Skov Dahl, Department of Political Science and Public Management, University of Southern Denmark (SDU), Denmark.During my stay at SCANCOR (July – December 2004) my main focus was to work on my Dissertation which has the working title “Standardization in the Public Sector in Denmark”.

I presented two papers during the stay: one in the informal Scancor seminar: “Standardization as a means of control in the public sector – The Danish case”. The paper will appear as a part of one of the chapters in my dissertation. The other paper “Diffusion of Standards” (co-authored) was presented at the Comparative Workshop (with Professor John Meyer). The paper is submitted to an international journal. Besides the two papers I had one small presentation at the Monday lunch seminar with Jim March.

In addition to the presentations I revised and resubmitted a (co-authored) paper: “Fleksible jobpakker gennem lønkompensation – afvejning af jobkarakteristika” which has appeared in Økonomi & Politik 2004 (Danish journal). I got a (co-authored) working paper “Spørgeskemaundersøgelse af brugen af Fælles sprog I de danske kommuner” published in Politologiske Skrifter (Department of Political Science, SDU). Further I made a book review for the journal Nordic Journal of Public Administration (Nordisk Administrativt Tidsskrift).

I attended different seminars and workshops during the stay. On a weekly basis: 1) The Comparative Workshop (John Meyer) 2) The Scancor Seminar 3) The informal Scancor Seminar 4) Monday lunch seminar (Jim March).

Lone Dirckinck-Holmfeld, Department of Communication Aalborg University (AAU)

In the fall, my time at SCANCOR was spent on finalising work related to ongoing projects. E-Learning Lab is partner in the European Network of Excellence, Kaleidoscope on Technology Enhanced Learning, and leading a project on “Conditions for productive learning in networked learning environment”. The work is reported in Lone Dirckinck-Holmfeld et. al. (2004). Further more, I worked on the paper CSCL. The next ten years - a view from Europe, together with Chris Jones, Lancaster University and Berner Lindström, Göteborg University. The paper was accepted as a plenary paper at the International conference on “Computer Supported Collaborative Learning” in Taipei and invited to be published in the inaugural number of the ijCSCL Journal. Finally, I was engaged in preparing the Research Summit on Power Users of Technology at United Nations Headquarters in New York. I enjoyed very much to be at SCANCOR – to participate in the internal seminars for SCANCOR scholars, the informal Scandinavian seminars on Fridays, the Munch, seminars at the School of Education, and not least the Friday afternoon wine party and other colloquial activities.

37

Espen Gressetvold, Trondheim Business School, NorwayI stayed at Scancor for three months during the summer of 2004. My dissertation day had taken place only a month earlier (30 April 2004), with the title: “Product Development – Effects on a Company’s Network of Relationships”. During my stay at Scancor, I mainly worked with two projects: (1) I completed the article “Produktutvikling i nytt lys – fokus på fire typer effekter (Product Development in a New Light – Focus on Four Types of Effects), which appeared in Magma, 2004, Vol.7, No.4, pp.101-14. The article is a conceptual work based on my PhD-thesis. (2) I worked on a project on relationships between a university and the organizations in a region. In particular on this project I benefited from Stanford faculty and library facilities. On a general basis, faculty at Stanford University and Scancor provided a fruitful atmosphere for academic discussions.

Thomas Heinze, Fraunhofer Institute Systems and Innovation Research, Karlsruhe (Germany)During may stay at SCANCOR (January-June 2004), I worked primarily on finalizing my PhD thesis (submitted in October 2004). The thesis is titled (written in German): Science-based technologies, organizations and networks. An analysis on the coupling of the science system and the economic system in the field of nanotechnology in Germany.

In the context of this work I wrote two draft papers. First, I analyzed publication and patent data in the field of nanotechnology in Europe including comparisons with the United States (published in Nanotechnology, Law & Business 1 (4) 2004). The second article summarizes theoretical ideas on the interaction of research and business organizations in fields of knowledge-intensive technologies (published in Zeitschrift für Soziologie 34 (1), 2005). Together with Stine Grodal, a doctoral student in Management, Science & Engineering at Stanford, I conducted interviews at Stanford with researchers, venture capitalists and business people in the field of nanotechnology.

I very much enjoyed the weekly SCANCOR seminars which offered a broad range of interesting topics and a unique atmosphere of intellectual exchange. I also participated in the informal SCANCOR seminars and co-organized a session on Why does man organize? together with Jozef Bátora, another Scancor visiting scholar. In addition I attended and contributed to Jim March’s Monday lunch sessions, Woody Powell’s lab sessions and Prof. Marc Granovetter’s SIVNAP meetings. Finally, I regularly attended John Meyer’s seminar.

Ingjaldur Hannibalsson, Department of Business Administration, University of IcelandI stayed at Scancor from January until April, during my sabbatical in 2004. My main project was doing research on university management in different cultures. I used the Stanford library extensively to access books and periodicals on the subject. During my stay at Scancor I studied the organization, governance and financing of Stanford University and interviewed numerous people, both academics and administrators, at different levels of the organization. At Scancor I also prepared my visits to universities in Egypt, Kenya, Australia, Japan, China, Thailand and Denmark that followed my stay at Scancor.   

38

During my stay at Scancor I was able to sit in on two MBA courses in Operations Management and International Business. These courses are similar to courses I teach at the University of Iceland and experiencing excellent teaching at Stanford will help me to improve my teaching skills. Already I have given several lectures on university organization, governance and financing in different cultures which are based on the work I did during my stay at Scancor and elsewhere in 2004.   

Per Lægreid, University of BergenDuring my stay at Scancor form September to December 2004 my activities comprised of a) working on and finalizing work-in-progress pieces, b) attending seminars and workshops and c) working on the research project “Regulation, Control and Audit” as well as a Nordic project on “Representative democracy, administrative reforms and Europeanization”.

I have concluded three articles and one book chapter which have been accepted in international journal and books: “Trust in Government – the relative importance of service satisfaction, political factors and demography” (with T. Christensen). Public Performance & Management Review (forthcoming 2005); "Den norske sykehusreformen. Mer politisk styring enn fristilling?" (With I. Stigen and S. Opedal). Nordiske Organisasjonsstudier (forthcoming 2005), “Globalization of Administrative Reforms: The Dilemmas of Combining Political Control and Increased Institutional Autonomy”. (with T. Christensen) I A. Farazmand ed. Handbook of Globalization and Administrative Reform (forthcoming 2005/2006); “The Norwegian Hospital Reform – Balancing political control and enterprise autonomy” (with S. Opedal and I.M. Stigen) Journal of Health Politics (forthcoming).

Three papers have been submitted to international journals and are under review: “Regulatory agencies – the challenge of balancing agency autonomy and political control”. (with T. Christensen) Submitted to Governance; “Organizing for Homeland Security: The Case of Norway” (with S. Serigstad). Submitted to Journal of Management Studies; “Performance Management and Public Sector Reform: The Norwegian Hospital Reform” with T. Christensen and I.M. Stigen. Submitted to International Public Management Journal.

I have also written a report for the Norwegian Government Commission on Local democracy on “Government coordination, specialization and local autonomy” (with A.L. Fimreite).

I have also been working with Professor Lois Wise, Indiana University, Bloomington on a review chapter for a handbook on New Public management and personnel reforms.

I have attended the Scancor seminar and presented the paper “Regulatory agencies – the challenge of balancing autonomy and political control”, October 18. I have also attended the informal Scancor seminars; the Comparative Workshop headed by F. Ramirez and J. Meyer, the CICAC Research Seminar on International security and Social Sciences and the Monday lunch seminars with James G. March. In October I

39

gave a talk at University of Indiana, Bloomington on “Consequences for Nordic Central Governments of Increased Integration in Europe”.

In December I arranged an informal workshop at Scancor on the project “Representative democracy, administrative reforms and Europeanization”, with participants form all five Nordic countries. I also attended a workshop in Dublin, Ireland in December connected to the project “Regulation Control and Audit”. For both workshops I prepared papers for presentation and discussion.

Reijo Miettinen, Center for Activity Theory and Developmental Work Research, University of HelsinkiDuring my stay at Scancor (May-June 2004) I had three goals. First, as social psychologist and student of innovations networks I wanted to learn more about new institutionalism in organizational theory, and more specifically about the theory of networks as an organizational form alternative to hierarchy and markets, proposed by, among others, Walter Powell. Through discussions with the doctoral students and visiting scholars, by reading as well as by having an opportunity to interview professor Powell, this goal was well achieved. Secondly I finalized a paper (Miettinen, R. & Virkkunen, J. Epistemic objects, artifacts and organizational change) that is published in the journal Organization in Spring 2005 (no 3). What I learned about organizational theory greatly helped the writing of the paper. Thirdly, I wrote a manuscript for a book on the change of research work and university in knowledge society. Green library’s excellent collection of the literature on the theme greatly facilitated this work. In a word, the working conditions for a visiting a scholar in Scancor are the best I have met.

Arne Remmen, Department of Development and Planning, Aalborg University (AAU)

Maija Renko, Turku UniversityI visited Scancor from April till December in 2004. My main objective for the time at Scancor was to complete data collection for my dissertation. Before coming to California, I had already collected an interview dataset from 60 small biotechnology firms in Finland, Sweden, South Florida, and Pennsylvania. I wanted to complete the data collection by interviewing managers in Bay Area biotechs, and over my stay at Scancor I actually visited 25 such firms in the Bay Area. This was a really valuable experience and would not have been possible without Scancor. I have already written two conference papers based on the dataset and I hope finalize my dissertation in 2005.

In addition to the data collection, Scancor gave me an opportunity to get to know some doctoral students from Stanford. Discussions with them – as well as with Scancor scholars and Stanford faculty - were often times helpful in sorting out my own thoughts regarding my dissertation and research interests. I had numerous more or less formal possibilities to tell other Scancor scholars about my dissertation and other research interests, and got valuable feedback from them. Events that I attended over the months at Scancor include “The International Biotech Summit, Biology At The Edge”, at University of California, Berkeley; “Wharton Impact Conference: Venture Capital: Theory meets Practice”, in San Francisco; Informal Friday seminars together with other

40

Scancor Scholars; Scancor’s Monday seminars; Monday lunch seminars with Jim March; the First Innovation Journalism Conference at Stanford University; “Scandinavia at Stanford: Approaches to the Study of Markets and Institutions”- seminar for doctoral students; and meetings of the Finnish National Technology Agency TEKES. In addition, I audited a doctoral course on Organization & Strategy by Stanford Professor Kathy Eisenhardt in Fall term 2004 and Stanford’s Spanish Language Program’s “Spanish 3: First-Year, Third Quarter” classes in Spring 2004.

Hans Rämö, Stockholm University School of Business, Sweden I spent the summer at SCANCOR in 2004. I completed two papers, which have been published in Organization and Journal of Managerial Psychology in December 2004. The visit also included conversations with Stanford and San Francisco State University faculty on new lines of inquiry, and on a book manuscript.Publications in 2004

Amir Sasson, the Norwegian School of Management,  BI, Norway During my stay at SCANCOR, I conducted the following activities:

Academic Self-development. I participated in doctoral courses, which were intriguing. I can warmly recommend taking any course in order to learn not just about this or that theory but also to develop the understanding of how teaching is conducted in one of the best academic facilities in the world. I took a course about Social Exchange Theory and participated in courses about Time Series Analysis and Matrix Algebra.

Research. I wrote two articles, which together constitute the bulk part of my doctoral dissertation. One of them, Value of Affiliation: Composition and Redundancy of Financial Networks will be presented at the Academy of Management meeting in Hawaii 2005. The other, The Virtual In-Crowd: The Impact of Horizontal, Vertical and Immediate Agglomerative Co-Affiliations on Financial Performance will soon be sent for review in the Strategic Management Journal.

Seminars. I participated in as many seminars as I could. In addition to the SCANCOR seminars and the Monday lunch meetings with Jim March I also attended the Wednesday seminars at the Graduate School of Business and the Brown Bag Seminar at the Engineering School.

Networking. This was a rare opportunity for many Scandinavian scholars to establish connections outside Northern Europe. I found the Stanford scholars to be very friendly and open. I established connections with Stanford scholars as well as seminar presenters. The informal exchange of ideas and feedback has been extremely valuable and future professional cooperation initiatives are under way.

41

Helena Stensota, Göteborg UniversityMy time as a visiting scholar at Scancor was a very productive and enjoyable time. First, I have participated and completed several courses offered at the Department of Political Science at Stanford. I had the delightful opportunity to attend the course in Comparative Theory by Prof. David Laitin, an excellent course, as was also his subsequent course on Comparative Methods. I also participated in a course by Prof. Terry Moe on Politics and Organization. Further, I enjoyed the truly interdisciplinary Scancor seminars on Monday, as well as the Monday lunch seminar with Jim March.

Second, I worked on my main post-doc project. The project aims at explaining variances in social insurance administrative output within the Swedish context. The case study concerns sick-leave benefit administration. I developed a thorough research design on the grounds of relevant previous literature, which I became acquainted with during my stay at Scancor. I further participated in the elaboration of a survey connected to the subject. A paper connected to this project was presented at the Scancor/SOG workshop “Autonomization of the State: From Integrated Administrative Models to Single Purpose Organizations” April 1-2 2005. The Title of my paper was “Social Insurance Reform – The Case of Sick Leave Benefits in Sweden.”

Third, as I defended my dissertation in May 2004, I worked on a spin-off in the form of one article and a book-chapter written during my stay at Scancor. The book chapter will be published in an edited volume in Swedish “Den starka statens fall?” The article is currently under review. Its title is: “The Empathetic State – Kindergarten and Law Enforcement in Sweden 1950 – 2000.” Senja Svahn, Helsinki School of Economics Most of my time at SCANCOR was spent on work on my doctoral dissertation, Managing in different types of business nets: capability perspective (Helsinki School of Economics, HSE Series A-243, Helsinki), which I defended successfully in November, 2004. I also participated in Kathleen Eisenhardt’s PhD seminar on Organization and Strategy (Stanford), and in the Helsinki University of Technology’s MBA-training in Palo Alto. My presentations at Stanford include a paper at the internal seminar for SCANOR scholars and a paper at Eisenhardt’s seminar. Additional work involved the planning of a course on Knowledge Management, to be taught at the Helsinki School of Economics in the Spring of 2005, and the finalization of a number of works that were in the late stages of the publication process.

42

Appendix 7

SCANCOR Visitors, 2004

30 January 2004A group of 27 Danish county directors visited Scancor during a study tour in the U.S. During their trip, they were studying issues such as health care, traffic planning, environmental issues and technology and business development. Scancor Director Walter W. Powell and Professor emeritus S. Richard Scott addressed the group.

March 1 2004Scancor Director Walter W. Powell made a presentation to the Service Management Academy, a group study tour sponsored by the Copenhagen Business School Center for Executive Learning and Leadership.

17 May 2004A group of Scandinavian educators visited Scancor and the Stanford School of Education for a one-day workshop on “Sharing Lessons from Accountability Systems-Building in Education.” Among the participants were Trond Feveloden, Permanent Secretary, Norway; Eric Hanushek, Professor, Stanford; Mike Kirst, Professor, Stanford; Director General Johan Raaum from Denmark; and Norton Grubb, Professor, University of California, Berkeley.

December 13-14 2004Professor Per Lægreid of the University of Bergen arranged an informal workshop at Scancor on the project "Representative Democracy, Administrative Reforms and Europeanization", with participants from all five Nordic Countries: Smari Steinthorsson (Iceland), Siv Sandberg (Finland), Bengt Jacobsson and Gørand Sundstrøm (Sweden), Ove K. Pedersen, Anders Esmark and Guri Weihe (Denmark)

43

Appendix 8

Visiting scholars graduated as Ph.D.

DenmarkJohn Christiansen Copenhagen Business School 1990Lars Bo Henriksen Aalborg University 1992Per Dannemann Andersen Research Center Risoe 1992Jesper Bo Jensen Aalborg University 1993Peter Karnøe Copenhagen Business School 1993Pernille Lorenzen Aarhus Business School 1993Hans Laurits Thanning Copenhagen Business School 1994Helle Holt Danish National Institute of

Social Science 1994Agi Csonka Danish National Institute of

Social Science 1994Morten Vendelø Copenhagen Business School 1995Stig Hartman Copenhagen Business School 1996Eva Zeuthen Bentsen Copenhagen Business School 1997Morten Balle Hansen Odense University 1997Hubert Staudt Copenhagen Business School 1997Niels N. Kristensen Aalborg University 1997Poul Hansen Aalborg University 1997Kim Lynge Aalborg University 1997Martin Fuglsang Copenhagen Business School 1998Per Christensen Aalborg University 1998Henrik Bang Copenhagen Business School 1998Kristina Lee Copenhagen Business School 1998Rikke Berg Odense University 1999Peter Boye Copenhagen Business School 1999Kenneth M. Jørgensen Aalborg University 2000Hans Chr. Johnsen Copenhagen Business School 2000Mads Storgaard Copenhagen Business School 2000Christian Tangkjær Copenhagen Business School 2000Claus Rerup Aarhus Business School 2001Lene Holm Pedersen University of Copenhagen 2003Martin Grieger Copenhagen Business School 2004

FinlandIngmar Björkman Swedish School of Economics 1989Sören Kock Swedish School of Economics, Vasa 1991Mika Pantzar Helsinki School of Economics 1991Kimmo Kuitunen Helsinki School of Economics 1993Kaj Hedvall Swedish School of Economics 1994Camilla Lohrum Swedish School of Economics 1996Annele Eerola Swedish School of Economics 1997Magnus Enckell Swedish School of Economics 1998

44

Patrick Kvikant Swedish School of Economics 1998Tuomo Peltonen Helsinki School of Economics 1998Jarmo Vakkuri University of Tampere 1998Annele Eerola Swedish School of Economics 1998Eero Vaara Helsinki School of Economics 1999Janne Tienari Helsinki School of Economics 1999Päivi Oinas Helsinki School of Economics 1999Markku Maula Helsinki University of Technology 2001

GermanyNicola Sauer University of Mannheim 2003

NorwayBjørge Gretland Norwegian School of Economics

and Business Administration 1991Arent Greve Norwegian School of

Business Administration 1992Lars Sørgard Norwegian School of Economics

and Business Administration 1992Paul G. Roness University of Bergen 1993Steinar Vagstad University of Bergen 1994Lars Chr. Blichner University of Bergen 1995Terje Hagen University of Oslo 1996Donatalla De Palio Norwegian School of Economics and

Business Administration 1996Gunnar Rongen University of Oslo 1996Bjarne Espedal University of Bergen 1996Kjetil Bjornvatn Norwegian School of Economics and

Business Administration 1996Linda Sangolt University of Bergen 1997Bjørnar Reitan University of Science and Technology 1998Hans Krogh Hvide Norwegian School of Economics and

Business Administration 1998Svein Ole Borgen Agricultural University of Norway 1998Turid Moldenæs University of Tromsø 1999Oddvar Kaarbø University of Bergen 2000Ivar Bragelien, Norwegian School of Economics and

Business Administration 2000Per Ingvar Olsen Norwegian School of Management 2000Torbjørn Korsvold Norwegian University of Sc. & Tech. 2002Kristin Dale Norwegian School of Economics and

Business Administration 2003Ola Kvaloy Norwegian School of Economics and

Business Administration 2003Arild Wæraas University of Tromsø 2004Jarle Aarstad Norwegian School of Management 2004Torbjørn Heyerdahl Norwegian Business School 2004

45

Arild Frasund University of Bergen 2004Lars Erik Kjekshus University of Oslo 2004

Sweden

Anders Forssell Stockholm School of Economics 1992Johan Stein Stockholm School of Economics 1994Mats Engwall Stockholm School of Economics 1995Jesper Blomberg Stockholm School of Economics 1996Jerker Denrell Stockholm School of Economics 1998Shirin Ahlbäck Öberg Uppsala University 1999C.F. Helgesson Stockholm School of Economics 1999Fredrik Tell Linköping University 2000Mikael Holmqvist Stockholm University 2000Matthias Viklund Stockholm School of Economics 2003Thomas Persson Uppsala University 2003

46

Appendix 9

Publications by former and present scholars

Adenfelt, M., & Lagerström, K. (2005): Seize the opportunities of being multinational: a study of organizational rejuvenation, relationships and knowledge. In Hadjikhani, A., Ghauri, P and Johanson, J. (Eds). Opportunity development and business networks, UK: Palgrave. Adenfelt, M., Holm, U. & Holmström, C. (2005): Headquarters’ recognition and corporate relationships in MNCs - intra- corporate transfer of subsidiary competence. In Hadjikhani, A. and Lee, J-W (Eds) International markets and business networks, Brain Korea Publishing, South Korea.

Almbjerg, Sarah Kirkeby & Vendelø, Morten (2004): Venturekapitalisters Sociale kapital. Ledelse og Erhvervsøkonomi 4/2004, pp. 265-274.

Batora, Jozef (2005) Does the European Union Transform the Institution of Diplomacy? Journal of European Public Policy, 12(1), PP.44-66

Bleiklie, Ivar, Malcolm Goggin & Christine Rothmayr (Eds.) 2004, Comparative Biomedical Policy: Governing Assisted Reproductive Technologies. London: Routledge.

Bleiklie, Ivar (2004): Norway: holding back competition? In Hood, C., O. James, B. G, Peters & C. Scott (Eds) Controlling Modern Government, London: Edward Elgar.

Bleiklie, Ivar & Roar Høstaker (2004): Modernizing Research Training - Education and science policy between profession, discipline and academic institution, Higher Education Policy. 17 (2): 221-236.

Bleiklie, Ivar, Malcolm Goggin, Deborah Orth & Christine Rothmayr (2004): The Comparative Policy Design Perspective. In I. Bleiklie, M. Goggin & C. Rothmayr Comparative Biomedical Policy: How European and North American Countries Govern Assisted Reproductive Technologies. London: Routledge.

Bleiklie, Ivar (2004): Legislation for Protection. Why Norway designed restrictive policies in the field of ARTs.” In I. Bleiklie, M. Goggin & C. Rothmayr Comparative Biomedical Policy: How European and North American Countries Govern Assisted Reproductive Technologies. London: Routledge.

Bleiklie, Ivar, Christine Rothmayr, Frederic Varone, Uwe Serdült & Arco Timmermans (2004): Comparing Policy Design across Countries: What Accounts For Variation in Art Policy? In I. Bleiklie, M. Goggin & C. Rothmayr Comparative Biomedical Policy: How European and North American Countries Govern Assisted Reproductive Technologies. London: Routledge.

Bleiklie, Ivar (2004): Institutional Conditions and the Responsibilities of Universities. Prepared for the Annual Conference of the Consortium of Higher Education

47

Researchers, Enschede, September 17 - 19, 2004. Stein Rokkan Centre, Working paper 13-2004.

Dirckinck-Holmfeld, L., Lindström, B., Svendsen, B. M., & Ponti, M. (2004): Conditions for Productive Learning in Networked Learning Environments, D24.3.1Jointly Executed Integrating Research Projects (JEIRP) on "Conditions for Productive Learning in Network Learning Environments", EU Framework 6 Network of Excellence Kaleidoscope. Prepared for the European Commission, DG INFSO as a deliverable for WP24.3. Aalborg: Aalborg University /Kaleidoscope

Dirckinck-Holmfeld, L. (2004): "Designing new learning environments for Power Users of Technology – Rationale for research". Paper for the Symposium on Power Users of Technology, United Nation, December 10th – 12th 2004.

Farsund, Arild Aurvåg (2004): Stabilitet og endring i norsk landbrukspolitikken: En studie av parlamentariske beslutninger og korporative forhandlinger. RF – rapport 2004/072.

Grieger, Martin (2004): Internet-based electronic marketplaces and supply chain management -a systems approach towards a holistic concept of utilizing internet-based electronic marketplaces to support supply chain management. PhD Series, nr.2004-1, Samfundslitteratur, København, 2004 331 pgs, Department of Operations Management, Copenhagen Business School (Institut for Produktion og Erhvervsøkonomi PEØ).

Heinze, Thomas (2005): Science-Based Technologies, Organizations, and Networks. An Analysis of the Coupling Process Between Science and Economy. Zeitschrift für Soziologie 34, 1/2005; pp. 60-82 (written in German). 

Heinze, Thomas (2004): Nanoscience and Nanotechnology in Europe: Analysis of Publications and Patent Applications including Comparisons with the United States. Nanotechnology, Law and Business 1, 4/2004, pp. 427-445.

Holgaard, Jette Egelund & Arne Remmen (2004): Tavs viden som organisatorisk ressource i virksomhedernes miljøarbejde. In Annette Kolmos (red.)Tavs viden. Technology, Environment & Society : Department of Development and Planning : Aalborg University, Aalborg, 2004.s. 103-118. (Research report ; Nr. 2).

Jones, C., L. Dirckinck-Holmfeld, et al. (2004): CSCL The next ten years – a European perspective. CSCL 2005, Taiwan. (Paper accepted for plenary presentation).

Jørgensen, Tine Herreborg, Mellado, Marie Dolores, Remmen, Arne (2004) Integrated management systems. 2004, 19 s.. (Working paper; Nr. 7).

Kørnøv, Lone, Lund, Henrik & Remmen, Arne (2004) Introduction. In Lone Kørnøv, Henrik Lund & Arne Remmen (Eds.) Environmental planning and management : tools for a sustainable development. Department of Development and Planning : Aalborg University, Aalborg, 2004.

48

Lægreid, Per (2004): Organisasjonsteori for offentlig sektor. Instrument, kultur, myte.(Organization theory for public sector, Instrument, culture, myth) (with T. Christensen, P.G. Roness and K.A. Røvik) Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.

Lægreid, Per, R.S. Steinthorsson and B. Thorhallsson (2004): The organization of central government administration in the Nordic states. Journal of Common Market Studies, 42 (2): 347-369.

Lægreid, Per (with B. Jacobsson and O.K. Pedersen) (2004): Robust and Flexible States: The Transnationalization of Nordic Central Administration”. Zeitschrift für Staats- und Europawissenschaften, 2 (1): 32-55.

Lægreid, Per (with T. Christensen) (2004): Public Administration Research in Norway: Organization Theory, Institutionalism and Empirical Studies in a Democratic Context. Public Administration 83 (3), 679-690.

Lægreid, Per (with T. Christensen) (2004: Governmental Autonomization and Control – The Norwegian Way. Public Administration and Development, 24: 129-135.

Lægreid, Per (with T. Christensen) (2004): Regulatory agencies – the challenge of balancing agency autonomy and political control. Paper presented at the 20th Anniversary Conference of the SOG Research Committee of IPSA, Vancouver June 15-17. Revised version presented at the Scancor seminar, Stanford University, October 18. 2004. Also printed as Working Paper 18/2004. Bergen: Rokkan Centre.

Lægreid, Per (with S. Serigstad) (2004) Organizing for Homeland Security: The Case of Norway. Paper presented at the EGOS Conference, Ljubljana, July 1-3. Also printed as Working Paper 12/2004. Bergen: Rokkan Centre.

Maula MVJ, Autio E, Murray GC. (2005): Corporate Venture Capitalists and Independent Venture Capitalists: What Do They Know, Who Do They Know, and Should Entrepreneurs Care? Article reprinted in Elfring T. Corporate Entrepreneurship and Venturing. Springer, New York.

Maula MVJ, Autio E, Murray G. (2005): Corporate Venture Capitalists and Independent Venture Capitalists: What Do They Know, Who Do They Know, and Should Entrepreneurs Care? Venture Capital: An International Journal of Entrepreneurial Finance 7(1): 3-19.

Miettinen, Reijo & Virkkunen, Jaakko (2005): Epistemic objects, artifacts and organizational change. Organization. Vol 12 (3), 437-456.

Remmen, Arne, Mosgaard, Mette (2004): Product chain collaboration and environmental innovations: a task for different stakeholders. In: Electronics goes green 2004 : Driving forces for future electronics : Proceedings. Herbert Reichl, Hansjörg Griese, Harald Pötter (Eds.). Fraunhofer IRB Verlag, Stuttgart, Germany, p. 719-722.

49

Remmen, Arne & Thrane, Mikkel (2004): Life cycle thinking. In Lone Kørnøv , Henrik Lund, Arne Remmen (Eds.) Environmental Planning and management : Tools for a sustainable development. Department of Development and Planning : Aalborg University, Aalborg, 2004

Remmen, Arne, Larsen, Torben & Mosgaard, Mette (2004): Digital forvaltning: erfaringer fra Det Digitale Nordjylland. In Lone Dirckinck-Holmfeld (red.): Bent Dalum, Jens Ulrich & Egil Boisen (red.) Det Digitale Nordjylland : IKT og omstilling til netværkssamfundet. Aalborg Universitetsforlag, Aalborg, 2004.s. 121-147

Remmen, Arne & Holgaard, Jette Egelund (2004): Environmental innovations in the product chain. In Carla Smink (Ed.) Innovation for sustainability : with case studies from the organic dairy industry, the fish processing industry and the car industry. Technology, Environment and Society : Department of Development and Planning : Aalborg University, 2004. (Working Paper ; Nr. 4)Rämö, H. (2004): Spatio-Temporal Notions and Organized Environmental Issues - An Axiology of Action', Organization, Vol.11, No.6, pp. 849-872.

Rämö, H. (2004): Moments of Trust. Temporal and Spatial Factors of Trust in Organizations, Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol.19, No.8, pp. 760-775.

Rämö, H. (2004) 'Spatio-Temporal Notions and Organized Environmental Issues - An Axiology of Action', Organization, Vol.11, No.6, pp. 849-872.

Renko, Maija(Forthcoming: Sourcing market knowledge in biotechnology. In Philip Cooke & Andrea Piccaluga (Eds.) Regional Development in the Knowledge Economy. Uk: Regional Development and Public Policy Series, Routledge and Regional Studies Association.

Renko, Maija (Co-authored with Professors Alan Carsrud and Malin Brännback) (Forthcoming): Market pull and science push - networked market orientation of biotechnology SMEs. Paper presented at the Biotech Society Conference in Espoo, Finland, in Sept 2003. Paper submitted and accepted for publication in the conference special issue of International Journal of Biotechnology.

Renko, Maija (Forthcoming): Market Knowledge in Young Technology Venture. Paper accepted for presentation in the 2005 Babson College-Kauffman Foundation Entrepreneurship Research Conference at Babson College, June 9 to June 11, 2005.

Renko, Maija (Forthcoming): Integrating market knowledge into R&D – typology of challenges in young biotechnology firms. Paper accepted for presentation and conference proceedings of the 2005 50th World Conference of ICSB (International Council for Small Businesses), Washington, DC, 15-18 June 2005.

50

Taps Stig B. (2003): An empirical analysis of the Coordination Mechanisms in International Manufacturing Joint Ventures located in Developing Regions.In proceeding of The 6thQMOD conference (Quality Management and Organizational Development),1-3 oct., Paris, France.

Taps, Stig B. (2003): Configuration of Mnaufacturing Processes in Developing Regions. Empirical research and descriptive report on Danish manufacturing firms. PhD thesis. Department of Production, Aalborg University, December 2003. ISBN 87-91200-29-6 Taps,  Stig B. (2004): Managing manufacturing operations in transitional economies. Empirical findings of configuration of organizational structures. In proceding of the Academy of World Business, Marketing and Management Development (AWBMAMD) conference, 13-16 July, Gold Coast, Quensland, Australia.  Taps, Stig B.  and Kenn Steger-Jensen (2005): An empirical analysis of the product-process matrix. Paper to be presented on the Stimulating Manufacturing Excellence in Small and Medium Enterprises (SMESME 2005) conference, 12-15 June, Glasgow Scotland Taps, Stig B. and Kenn Stger-Jensen, Niels Gorm Rytter (2005): The rise of organizational bureacracy, the momentum of effective performance machine in uncertain contextual settings. Paper to be presented on the IFIP 5.7 Advances in Production Management System. Modelling and implementing the integrated enterprise (APMS2005 conference. Rockville, Washington DC, USA

 

51

SUMMARY TABULATION OF SCANCOR Appendix 10NATIONAL CONTRIBUTIONS

Country 1989 - 2004 2004$

Denmark 760,625 29.15 37,500 22.22Finland 448,625 17.19 37,500 22.22Norway 706,700 27.10 37,500 22.22Sweden 625,000 23.95 37,500 22.22Mannheim 50,000 1.91 12,500 7.41Iceland 18,750 0.70 6,250 3.70Total 2,609,700 100.00 168,750 100.00

SUMMARY TABULATION OFSCANCOR USA UTILIZATION BY COUNTRY

1989 – December 20004 2004Country Total 1 Total 2 Total 3 Total 1 Total 2 Total 3Denmark%

239 20

323 23

4204 25

7 8

9 10

16 13

Finland%

191 16

215 15

254 15

11 12

13 13

24 19

Norway%

426 35

481 34

567 33

27 31

27 28

27 21

Sweden%

316 26

366 26

428 25

34 39

37 39

51 39

Iceland%

11 1

11 .5

13 .5

4 4

4 4

5 4

Mannheim%

23 2

29 1.5

31 1.5

5 6

5 5

5 4

Total%

1206 100

1425 100

1712 100

88 100

95 100

128 100

Total 1 = The total number of scholar months (including only regular SCANCOR Scholars at desks)Total 2 = The total number of scholar months (including months at vacant desks by affiliated scholars)Total 3 = The total number of scholar months (including all months spent at Stanford by affiliated scholars)Note: A ‘scholar month’ is defined as a month, or any part of a month, spent at SCANCOR.

52

SCANCOR Visiting Scholars Statistics 1989 – 2004 Appendix 11

Visiting Scholars at Scancor 1989-2004 by Country and GenderCountry Female Male Total % of all

ScholarsDenmark 19 59 78 25Finland 16 29 45 14France 1 1 0Germany 4 4 8 3Iceland 1 6 7 2Norway 12 74 86 27Sweden 31 57 88 28Total 83 230 313 100

Scholars from Denmark at Scancor 1989-2004 by Institution and GenderInstitution Female Male Total % of

all Schola

rsAalborg University 1 12 13 17Aarhus University 2 3 5 6AFK-Copenhagen 1 1 1Copenhagen Business School 11 36 47 60Danish National Institute of Social Research 2 1 3 4Management Research Institute 1 1 1University of Copenhagen 1 1 1University of Southern Denmark 1 6 7 9Total 19 59 78 100

Scholars from Finland at Scancor 1989-2004 by Institution and GenderInstitution Female Male Total % of

all Schola

rsÅbo Akademi 2 1 3 7Helsinki School of Economics 6 13 19 42Helsinki University of Technology 2 2 4Swedish School of Economics, Helsinki 6 7 13 29Swedish School of Economics, Vasa 1 1 2Technological Research Center 1 1 2Turku University 1 1 2University of Helsinki 1 1 2University of Tampere 1 3 4 9Total 16 29 45 100

53

Scholars from Iceland at Scancor 1989-2004 by Institution and Gender

Institution Female Male Total

% of all Scholars

Lund Iceland 1 1 14University of Iceland 6 6 86Total 1 6 7 100

Scholars from Norway at Scancor 1989-2004 by Institution and GenderInstitution Female Male Total % of

all Schola

rsAgder College 2 2 2Agricultural University of Norway 1 1 1Bodø Graduate School of Business 1 1 1Hedmark College 1 1 1Ministry of Education – Norway 1 1 1NAVF 2 2 2Norwegian government 1 1 1Norwegian Institute for Urban and Regional Research (NIBR) 2 2 2Norwegian School of Economics and Business Administration 2 22 24 28Norwegian School of Management 1 5 6 7Norwegian University of Science and Technology 4 4 5Rogaland 1 1 1Rokkan Centre 1 10 11 13SNF 1 1 1Statsbygg 1 1 1Trondheim Business School 1 1 1University of Bergen 3 11 14 16University of Oslo 7 7 8University of Tromsø 3 2 5 6Total 12 74 86 100

Scholars from Sweden at Scancor 1989-2004 by Institution and GenderInstitution Female Male Total % of

all Schola

rs

54

Allmänna Ord i Sverige 1 1 1Chalmers University of Technology 1 2 3 3Göteborg University 3 7 10 11Karolinska Institute 1 1 1Linköping University 3 3 3Lund University 2 2 4 4Royal Institute of Technology 1 1 1Stockholm School of Economics 9 21 30 34Stockholm University 5 5 6Umeå University 3 5 8 9University of Jönköping 2 1 3 3University of Karlstad 1 1 1Uppsala University 7 9 16 18Växjö University 1 1 2 2Total 31 57 88 100

Scholars from France at Scancor 1989-2004 by Institution and GenderInstitution Female Male Total % of

all Schola

rsCenter Sociology of Orgs 1 1 100Total 1 1 100

Scholars from Germany at Scancor 1989-2004 by Institution and GenderInstitution Female Male Total % of

all Schola

rsFraunhofer Institute 1 1 13University of Bamberg 1 1 13University of Mannheim 3 3 6 75Total 4 4 8 100

55

56

57