Search results

This paper introduces a hitherto unpublished 1970 paper written by Lauchlin Currie (1902–1993) on Paul Rosenstein Rodan’s famous 1943 paper on the “Big Push” which led to the balanced-unbalanced growth debate to which Albert Hirschman (1915–2012) was an important contributor. Both Currie and Hirschman had been key economic advisers to the Colombian government, and their respective views on development planning are contrasted. In particular, it is shown how Currie’s 1970 paper illuminates the theory behind the 1971–1974 national plan for Colombia that he prepared and helped deliver; and how the related institutional innovations have had an enduring impact on Colombia’s recent economic history.

The financial crisis demands that we in the business academy raise our game: we either caused it by training the generation of “greed is good” MBAs who designed those financial instruments of mass destruction, or failed to prevent it by not equipping them with appropriate caution and ethical standards. In short, we are either complicit or irrelevant. The purpose of this paper is to discuss how Michael Thomas anticipated both the causes and the lessons of the financial crisis, and made a robust call for change long before this became a mainstream concern.

The paper discusses the work and ideas of Michael Thomas in the context of the current financial crisis.

The paper concludes that we can respond to Michael Thomas' vision with a combination of muscular game keeping and intelligent poaching.

Michael Thomas's thinking has profound implications not just for marketing but the whole business sector. The newly established Stirling Institute for Socio‐Management (SISM) is responding to his call to look critically at current business models and completely reengineer our processes and procedures. SISM also argues that lessons learnt about influencing consumer behaviour can be applied to other parts of life such as social and health behaviours.

The paper highlights Michael Thomas's notions of a new, “social capitalism” founded on trust and transparency.

Introduces the special issue to mark the 10th anniversary of Lauchlin Currie's death. Currie was an economist described as the intellectual leader of the spending wing of Roosevelt's New Deal.

The case compares two U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) programs from the 1970s and 1980s: (1) “stealth” combat aircraft, capable of evading detection or engagement by anti-aircraft systems, and (2) precision attack of hardened ground vehicles from “standoff” distances, i.e., far behind the battle lines. Conceived at roughly the same time, motivated by the same strategic challenge, and initially driven by the same DoD organization, stealth combat aircraft progressed from idea to deployment in less than eight years---an astounding pace for a complex military system---while a demonstrated system for standoff precision strike against mobile ground targets was not fully implemented. The case highlights the critical role of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), part of the DoD, regarded as one of the most innovative entities in the U.S. federal government.

The case highlights factors that facilitate rapid, successful implementation of radically innovative or disruptive concepts. Students are introduced to the organizational realities facing such projects, including issues of strategic clarity, interdepartmental competition and cooperation, executive leadership, and timing. Comparing the differences in implementation of the two programs in the case reveals issues relevant to any large organization seeking to bring innovative concepts to fruition.

What it may lack in numbers, Scotland has always made up for in the independence and enterprise of its inhabitants. While Scotland cannot claim much part in the earliest stages of printed circuit development, it should come as no surprise that the land which bore Alexander Graham Bell and John Logie Baird should have seized the opportunity of exploiting this other aspect of innovative technology, and that, for its mere 5 million inhabitants, it should boast a disproportionately large share of involvement in the printed circuit board industry. The total number of people involved in the PCB manufacturing industry (non‐captive market only) in England has been estimated at approximately 9,000—the numbers involved in Scotland total approximately 2,000, not far off 25% of the English figure. Wales and Ireland trail behind with about 300 and 400 respectively, while the Isle of Man, putting up a good show, numbers 16. Michael Hannon, of Michael Hannon Marketing (Ayr), comments, ‘Scottish PCB manufacturers have a disproportionate share of the UK rigid PCB home and export markets, as well as including in their number one of the largest flexible manufacturers in the UK. Out of the top five UK/Republic of Ireland PCB manufacturers’ production, the Scottish manufacturers represent about 55%. This is quite surprising when one considers that Scotland's population represents less than 10% of the total.’ Narrowing the focus from country to specific area, the Borders region is host to a number of PCB companies which together account for 55% of PCBs manufactured in Scotland, and 10% of the UK total.

Describes a study to measure the quality of service provided by food‐poisoning surveillance agencies in England and Wales in terms of the requirements of a representative consumer ‐ the egg producing industry ‐ adopting “egg associated” outbreak investigation reports as the reference output. Defines and makes use of four primary performance indicators: accessibility of information; completeness of evidence supplied in food‐poisoning outbreak investigation reports as to the sources of infection in “egg‐associated” outbreaks; timeliness of information published; and utility of information and advice aimed at preventing or controlling food poisoning. Finds that quality expectations in each parameter measured are not met. Examines reasons why surveillance agencies have not delivered the quality demanded. Makes use of detailed case studies to illustrate inadequacies of current practice. Attributes failure to deliver “accessibility” to a lack of recognition on the status or nature of “consumers”, combined with a self‐maintenance motivation of the part of the surveillance agencies. Finds that failures to deliver “completeness” and “utility” may result from the same defects which give rise to the lack of “accessibility” in that, failing to recognize the consumers of a public service for what they are, the agencies feel no need to provide them with the data they require. The research indicates that self‐maintenance by scientific epidemiologists may introduce biases which when combined with a politically inspired need to transfer responsibility for food‐poisoning outbreaks, skew the conduct of investigations and their conclusions. Contends that this is compounded by serious and multiple inadequacies in the conduct of investigations, arising at least in part from the lack of training and relative inexperience of investigators, the whole conditioned by interdisciplinary rivalry between the professional groups staffing the different agencies. Finds that in addition failures to exploit or develop epidemiological technologies has affected the ability of investigators to resolve the uncertainties identified. Makes recommendations directed at improving the performance of the surveillance agencies which, if adopted will substantially enhance food poisoning control efforts.

A debate continues on whether the structural separation of incumbent telecommunications operators would increase competition in telecommunications markets leading to a more dynamic industry. John Cubbin and David Currie, the future Chairman of OfCom, and the OECD have both contributed to this debate. More recently (in Issue 4 of this Volume) Professor Martin Cave asked the question “Is LoopCo the answer?”. In the light of the regulators’ objectives in the new EU framework to promote efficient investment, this article answers some of Professor Cave’s arguments against structural separation and sets out a framework for analysing the impact of separation on innovation in the sector and in other industries which use telecommunications as a key input. The article draws on work conducted by other academics, notably The Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis and Michael Porter.