Author Archives: sfietze

Promote our content on the Ph.D. Network

Do you have any news (courses, call for papers, job announcements, etc.) that you would like to publish on the Ph.D. network website? You are welcome to write a post on our website and promote your content free of charge. Your relevant content will be promoted on our website, newsletter and social media.

We are currently accepting the following types of submissions:

  • Job Vacancies
  • Events, Courses & Conference Listings
  • Call for Papers

Arbeitsbedingungen deutscher Promovierender (Working conditions of German Ph.D. students)

Dear fellow doctoral students/candidates,

We, that is Iris Koch and Paul Goldmann, examine as part of our doctoral studies how the university environment affects us doctoral candidates. It would be great if you support our studies by taking part in a 4-waves longitudinal study! This will take approximately 10-15 min per wave. Please be ensured that all your data will be treated anonymously and confidentially. To take part, please follow the link http://ww2.unipark.de/uc/promovierende_0/ and fill out the German questionnaire (there is no English version).

If you would like to support us even further, please share our study with your fellow colleagues who also are working on their PhD thesis. In case there are any questions, please feel free to contact us writing a mail to umfrage.auopsych@uni-bamberg.de.

Thanks for your support and best wishes,
Iris and Paul

Further informtion

Reminder – MREV – Call for Papers – Corporate responsibility: In the dilemma between trust and fake?

Seminar at the IUC Dubrovnik (April 3-7, 2017) & Special Issue

Seminar Organizers & Guest Editors:
Simon Fietze, University of Southern Denmark
Wenzel Matiaske, Helmut-Schmidt-University/University of the Federal Armed Forces Hamburg (Germany)
Roland Menges, Technical University Clausthal (Germany)

Trust is the currency that creates markets. This is knowledge of the merchants at the latest since modern markets have emerged along the medieval trade routes. Quality and reliability in the business are also building blocks of trust and the assumption of responsibility for the social and ecological consequences of entrepreneurial activity. Whether the latter should be integrated into social and legal relations and norms in the form of voluntary corporate responsibility, has been the subject of economic discussion since the beginnings of the discipline and since the separation of the spheres of economic and moral action in the Scottish moral economy.

Over the past decades, both supra-national organizations such as the UN and the EU have been focusing on soft law – from the global compact through the AA1000 to the Green Paper of the EU Commission – as well as the national states, to promote social and environmental responsibility for companies in the age of globalization. These initiatives have led to lively activities and debates both in the business world and in different scientific disciplines. For companies, it has now become a “fashion” to campaign social and ecological responsibility using the concept of “Corporate Social Responsibility”. This commitment has meanwhile led to the fact that CSR activities should partly contribute to value creation instead of aligning them with corporate objectives and values. Such a development leads to the loss of trust and the assumption of responsibility becomes a “fake”.

Against this backdrop, some of the social and economic observers remained skeptical, advocating tougher legal norms or fiscal implications. Finally, lawyers pointed out that (successful) standardizations often develop not only from the “top”, but also from the “bottom”, i.e. they emerge from the action routines of the economic actors as emergent effects. However, not only the recent scandals – from the ENRON case to the VW case – raise questions about the effectiveness of co-operative self-commitment as well as external control.

Moreover, corporate responsibility is related to the concept of consumer responsibility. Whereas market-optimists believe that reliable changes in consumption patterns rely on responsible individual action, more market-skeptics warn of a counterproductive “privatization of sustainability”.

In this light, this year’s seminar at the IUC Dubrovnik will be on theoretical and empirical contributions to the topic “Corporate responsibility: In the dilemma between trust and fake?” from economic, sociological, (economic) historical and legal perspectives. Possible topics are:

  • Economic and history of ideas cases and questions of corporate responsibility
  • The “pseudo” corporate responsibility
  • Organizational and sociological theories and findings on corporate responsibility
  • Theory and empiricism of the audit
  • Theoretical and empirical studies on consumer responsibility
  • Criminal law considerations for corporate actors
  • Institutional factors of corporate responsibility
  • The trust of social entrepreneurship
  • This is not an exhaustive list.

Deadline
Potential contributors to the seminar at the IUC Dubrovnik are encouraged to submit an abstract of 1-2 pages before February 28th, 2017 electronically via online submission system of Management Revue using ‘IUC Dubrovnik’ as article section: http://www.management-revue.org/submission/

All contributors to the seminar are invited to submit their paper for the special issue of Management Revue. Full papers must be submitted by July 31st, 2017. All contributions will be subject to a double-blind review. Papers invited to a ‘revise and resubmit’ are due October 31st, 2017. Please submit your papers electronically via the online submission system using ‘SI Corporate Responsibility’ as article section.

Hoping to hear from you!
Simon Fietze
Wenzel Matiaske
Roland Menges

Call for Papers: BAM2017 – Re-connecting management research with the disciplines: Shaping the research agenda for the social sciences

In the 30 years since the establishment of BAM, the field of management has become more mature, however, the social sciences in general are much more mature, and as such may be deemed to have a first mover advantage. For example, economics, psychology, social anthropology and sociology were recognized as distinct social sciences and established key publications and academic journals to disseminate their research in the 19th century. By comparison, management as an academic discipline was not recognized until the 20th century, well after these other disciplines. Furthermore, the social sciences also have a longer history of producing PhDs – some of whom became the founding scholars of the management community. This may have a number of effects, including the fact that many management scholars today have PhDs in non-management disciplines. The process of research training (in social science departments) institutionalizes the student into the core discipline (or field) that may have enduring effects. A second major factor that is perhaps limiting the ability of management to influence the related social sciences may be perceptions of its nature as ‘applied’ or bounded to a greater extent than others. We might expect to find that management imports theory from related social sciences, empirically tests the theory, and then exports the results back to the social sciences (and to practitioners), leading to export through applied journals (such as Journal of Applied Psychology). Any major developments in theory, however, would be expected to be most often developed in the social sciences, because developing theories that have general application is a primary element of their activity. On the other hand, management scholars who develop theory would be focused on business applications, which may result in theory that is not of general interest to the social sciences and, hence, less likely to be exported. If management is inherently applied, we might draw parallels with the relationship between management and the related social sciences and the relationship between medicine and the natural sciences. John Kay has argued the following: “In the last fifty years, the application of scientific method to medical subjects, and the development and adoption of knowledge gained in physics, chemistry and biology, has transformed their (doctors’) effectiveness. (However) Medicine remains a practical subject.” Therefore, it may be a perfectly natural state of affairs that management imports from the core social sciences, much the same way as medicine has done from physics, chemistry, and biology. However, some business schools are bucking the trend, and are moving into being at the forefront of debates by re-connecting with the social sciences. Alternatives to the ‘pure’ and ‘applied’ metaphor of research include questioning whether the social science of any field (e.g. religion, social movements, politics, law, science etc.) are any more or less applied than any other, questioning whether there is any such thing as ‘applied’ research and the adoption of other epistemologies and methodologies which disrupt such frameworks of thought.

These issues will be explored at the Conference, fittingly to be hosted by Warwick Business School, where the first BAM Conference was held 30 years ago.

Further information

MREV/EURAM – Call for Papers: Entrepreneurship and Managerialization in SMEs and family firms

Guest Editors:
Paola Vola, University of Eastern Piedmont, Novara, Italy
Sylvia Rohlfer, CUNEF, Madrid, Spain
Lucrezia Songini, University of Eastern Piedmont, Novara, Italy

The competitive landscape of the twenty-first century is dynamic, highlighting the need for organizations to be entrepreneurial. Thus, a scientific dialogue on entrepreneurial orientation and spirit in family businesses and SMEs has emerged as a relevant topic. However, the capacity to conjugate entrepreneurial spirit of family businesses and smaller enterprises with the managerialization of the organizational structure and mechanisms as well as the professionalization of people involved in the company is critical for the long-term survival and development of those firms.

Research on managerialization of SMEs and family firms points out that they are characterized by a lower adoption of managerial mechanism, as a consequence of the strong linkages between the owners/managers and the enterprise; and/or the lack of managerial knowledge at the ownership, governance and management levels. It is commonly underlined that the management in these firms is characterized by some degree of informality and that individual and social control systems are more suited to these enterprises, due to common shared values and languages, informal relationships etc. (Marlow, Taylor and Thompson, 2010; Saundry, Jones and Wimberley, 2014; Rohlfer, Munoz and Slocum, 2016).

However, some authors stated that formal mechanisms could help family owned businesses to cope with the interests and problems of both the company and the family, and their specific agency costs (Rue and Ibrahim, 1996; Schulze et al., 2003; Songini, Gnan et Malmi, 2013; Della Torre and Solari, 2013). Literature on family firms recognizes the importance of managerialization and professionalization in smoothing succession’s process.

This special issue of Management Revue and the corresponding Track 03_09 – Entrepreneurship and Managerialization in SMEs and family firms, under SIG 03 – Entrepreneurship, at EURAM 2017, provides an opportunity to take stock of developments on these issues, particularly on the adoption of management mechanisms and the professionalization of SMEs and family firms and their balance with entrepreneurial spirit.

We are looking for contributions that explore the ability of successful SMEs and family business to maintain fresh entrepreneurial spirit while consolidating management and control mechanisms, and introducing professional managers, but also for contributions that analyze the consequences of losing momentum in that balance.

Thus, we invite papers that make an important theoretical and/or empirical contribution to our understanding of such issues; international and comparative papers are particularly welcome. Areas of interest include but are not limited to:

  • How and why SMEs and family firms restructure and reorganize the management of the firm in the light of managerialization and professionalization?
  • How can SMEs and family firms balance entrepreneurial spirit and managerialization/ professionalization? How do they maintain this balance along time and during generations?
  • What is the role of family members and non-family members in balancing entrepreneurial spirit and managerialization/ professionalization?
  • What is the role of women (family and non-family members) in such a balance?
  • What is the role of managerial mechanisms and professional managers in SMEs and family firms’ development and growth?
  • What are the implications of managerialization and professionalization on key employee relations characteristics, such as pay and conditions, employee voice and labor management relations?
  • How and why owner/managers ́ approaches to managerialization and professionalization vary in relation to issues such as firm, sector, national contexts and employee characteristics, among others?
  • What are the implications for owner-managers and other stakeholders, including employees?
  • Which theories can best help us explain and understand managerialization and professionalization in SMEs and family firms, and the relation with entrepreneurship?

This is not an exhaustive list.

Management Revue is a peer-reviewed, interdisciplinary European journal publishing both qualitative and quantitative work, as well as purely theoretical papers that advances the study of management, organization, and industrial relations. Management Revue publishes articles that contribute to theory from a number of disciplines, including business and public administration, organizational behavior, economics, sociology, and psychology. Reviews of books relevant to management and organization studies are a regular feature (http://www.management-revue.org/).

European Academy of Management
The European Academy of Management (EURAM) is a learned society founded in 2001. It aims at advancing the academic discipline of management in Europe. With members from 49 countries in Europe and beyond, EURAM has a high degree of diversity and provides its members with opportunities to enrich debates over a variety of research management themes and traditions (http://euramonline.org/programme2017/tracks/sig-03-entrepreneurship-ent.html).

Potential authors
Authors are encouraged to submit research manuscripts that are likely to make a significant contribution to the literature on entrepreneurship and managerialization and professionalization in SMEs and family firms for a double-blind review process. Contributors to the Track 03_09 “Entrepreneurship and Managerialization in SMEs and family firms” at EURAM 2017 Conference are encouraged to discuss their sub- mission prior or during the conference. Even if conference participants will benefit from a fast review process, submissions are not solely restricted to conference participants.

Deadlines
Full papers for this special issue of Management Revue must be with the editors by 31 July 2017. All submissions will be subject to a double-blind review process. Papers invited for a “revise and resubmit” are due on the 30 November 2017. Final decision will be made by May 2018. The special issue will be published in late 2018.

Submission and guidelines
Please submit your papers electronically via the online submission system at http://www.management-revue.org/submission/ using SI “Managerialization” as article section.

The guest editors welcome informal enquiries by email:
Paola Vola
Sylvia Rohlfer
Lucrezia Songini

Literature

Aldrich, H. & Cliff, J. (2003). The pervasive effects of family on entrepreneurship: toward a family embeddedness perspective, Journal of Business Venturing, 18(5), 573-596.

Bettinelli, C., Fayolle, A. & Randerson, K. (2014). Family entrepreneurship: a developing field. Found. Trends Entrep., 10(3), 161–236.

Brannon, D. L., Wiklund, J. & Haynie, J. M. (2013). The varying effects of family relationships in entrepreneurial teams. Entrep. Theory Practice, 37(1), 107–132.

Chenall, R. (2003). Management control system design within its organizational context: findings from contingency-based research and directions for the future, Accounting Organizations and Society, 28 (2-3), 127-168.

Corbetta, G., Marchisio, G. & Salvato C. (2005). Fostering Entrepreneurship in Established Family Firms – Crossroads of Entrepreneurship, Springer.

Della Torre, E. & Solari, L. (2013). High-performance work systems and the change management process in medium-sized firms. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 24(13), 2583-2607.

Durán-Encalada, J. A., San Martín-Reyna, J. M. & Montiel-Campos, H. (2012). A Research Proposal to Examine Entrepreneurship in Family Business. Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation, 8(3), 58-77.

Fayolle, A. (2016). Family entrepreneurship: what we need to know. In K. Randerson, C. Bettinelli, G. Dossena, & A. Fayolle (eds.), Family Entrepreneurship: Rethinking the Research Agenda (pp. 304–306). Abingdon, UK: Routledge.

Hoy, F. & Sharma, P. (2010). Entrepreneurial Family Firms. New York, NY: Prentice Hall.

Jennings, J. E. & McDougald, M. S. (2007). Work–family interface experiences and coping strategies: implications for entrepreneurship research and practice. Academy of Management Review, 32(3), 747-760.

Malmi, T., & Brown, D. A. (2008). Management control system as packageOpportunities, challenges and research directions. Management Accounting Research, 19(4), 287-300.

Marlow, S. Taylor, S & Thompson, A. (2010). Informality and formality in medium-sized companies: contestation and synchronization. British Journal of Management, 20(4): 954-966.

Randerson, K., Bettinelli, C., Fayolle, A. & Anderson, A. (2015). Family entrepreneurship as a field of research: exploring its contours and contents. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 6(3), 143–154.

Randerson, K., Dossena, G. & Fayolle, A. (2016). The futures of family business: family entrepreneurship. Futures, 75, 36–43.

Rohlfer, S., Muñoz Salvador, C. and Slocum, A. (2016). People management in micro and small organizations – a comparative analysis. FUNCAS: Estudios de la Fundación. Series Análisis, no. 79.

Sharma, P. (2016). Preface. In K. Randerson, C. Bettinelli, G. Dossena, & A. Fayolle (eds.), Family Entrepreneurship: Rethinking the Research Agenda (p. xiv). Abingdon, UK: Routledge.

Songini L. (2006). The professionalization of family firm: theory and practice. In Poutziouris P., Smyrnios K. & Klein S. (eds.), Handbook of Research in Family Business (pp. 269-297). UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.

Songini, L. & Gnan, L. (2009). Glass ceiling and professionalization in family SMEs, Journal of Enterprising Culture, 17(4), 1-29.

Songini, L., Gnan, L., & Malmi, T. (2013). The role and impact of accounting in family business, Journal of Family Business Strategy, 4, 71-83.

Songini, L. & Gnan, L. (2014). The glass ceiling in SMEs and its impact on firm managerialization: A comparison between family and non-family SMEs, International Jounal of Business Governance and Ethics, 9(2): 287-312.

Songini, L. & Vola, P. (2014). The role of Managerialization and Professionalization in Family Busines Succession: Evidences from Italian Enterprises, in L. Gnan, H. Lundberg, L. Songini & M. Pelllegrini (eds.) Advancing European Entrepreneurship Research (169-196), IAP, Information Age Publishing Inc.

Songini, L. & Vola, P.(2015) The Role of Professionalization and Managerialization in Family Business Succession. Management Control, 2015/1, 9-43

Songini, L. & Gnan, L. (2015). Family Involvement and Agency Cost Control Mechanisms in Family Small and Medium-sized Enterprises, Journal of Small Business Management, 53(3), 748–779.

Management Revue – Socio-Economic Studies – Vol. 27, Issue 4 (Special Issue ‘Financial Participation’)

4th Issue 2016
Management Revue – Socio-Economic Studies, Volume 27

Special Issue ‘Financial Participation’
edited by Wenzel Matiaske, Andrew Pendleton & Erik Poutsma

Contents

Wenzel Matiaske, Andrew Pendleton, Erik Poutsma
Financial Participation – Introduction
download as PDF

Mathieu Floquet, Loris Guery, Chloé Guillot-Soulez, Patrice Laroche, Anne Stévenot
The relationship between profit-sharing schemes and wages: Evidence from French firms
download abstract as PDF

Olaf Kranz, Thomas Steger
Resurrected, recovered, but still didn’t survive? A case study on the viability of employee-owned companies
download abstract as PDF

Thomas Haipeter
Financialisation of wages and works councils’ policy: Profit sharing in the German metalworking and electrical engineering industries
download abstract as PDF

Renate Ortlieb, Wenzel Matiaske, Simon Fietze
Employee share ownership in Germany: A cluster analysis of firms’ aims
download abstract as PDF

Lutz Bellmann, Iris Möller
Are firms with financial participation of employees better off in a crisis? Evidence from the IAB Establishment Panel Survey
download abstract as PDF

Book Reviews
Paster, Thomas: The role of business in the development of the welfare state and labor markets in Germany: Containing social reforms (by Stefanie John)
download as PDF

Call for Papers

Corporate responsibility: In the dilemma between trust and fake?
Submission deadline for abstracts: 28 February 2017

Entrepreneurship and Managerialization in SMEs and family firms
Submission deadline: 31 July 2017

Demands in the modern workplace
Submission deadline: 31 January 2017

Echoes of an Era – A Century of Organisational Studies
Submission deadline: 31 December 2017

Forthcoming Issues

Perspectives on Sustainable Consumption
edited by Ortrud Lessmann & Torsten Masson

Digital Working Life
edited by Mikael Ottosson, Calle Rosengren, Doris Holtmann & Wenzel Matiaske

VHB ProDok: Simulation Modeling for Business Research

Institution: VHB ProDok

Lecturer: Prof. Dr. Catherine Cleophas (RWTH Aachen, School of Business and Economics)

Date: 10. – 13. April 2017

Place: Aachen

Registration: Please click on the link to open the registration form or send an email to doktorandenprogramm(at)vhbonline(dot)org.

Abstract:
Business research increasingly considers wicked problems and complex dynamic systems. Analytical models of such problems and systems quickly become untraceable and unsolvable. Given increasing computational power, simulation models provide an alternative tool. They can fuel studies tracing the long-term evolution of systems and comparing the outcomes of alternative scenarios. However, successfully applying simulation modelling for business research requires expertise on applicable simulation paradigms, approaches to model validation and the analysis of stochastic results.

Further information

VHB ProDok: Advanced Topics in Organization Theory

Institution: VHB ProDok

Lecturer: Univ.-Prof. Dr. Elke Schüßler (Johannes Kepler Universität Linz) & Prof. Dr. Jörg Sydow (Freie Universität Berlin)

Date: 4. – 7. April 2017

Place: Berlin

Registration: Please click on the link to open the registration form or send an email to doktorandenprogramm(at)vhbonline(dot)org.

Abstract:
This doctoral seminar exposes students to foundational and current research in organization theory. It specifically focuses on macro-organizational theory, derived largely from sociological and economic theoretical traditions. This type of organizational theory is interested in the interaction of organizational structures and processes with the wider political, economic, societal, or natural environment. Among others, it tries to explain the emergence of organizational forms and organizational survival, resource acquisition and utilization, interaction between organizations, the perception of organizations in society, or organizational responsibility. Instead of giving a comprehensive historical introduction into the “classics” of organization theory, this course will focus on current advancements of core theoretical concepts such as sensemaking, institutions, routines or networks as well as on more recent theoretical streams such as the ‘strong’ process view of organization or the communicative constitution of organization. Assessment will mainly be based on reading assignments and participation.

Further information

VHB ProDok: Probabilistic Models and Stochastic Programming

Institution: VHB ProDok

Lecturer: Prof. Dr. Stefan Helber (Leibniz Universität Hannover)

Date: 27. – 30. März 2017

Place: Hannover

Registration: Please click on the link to open the registration form or send an email to doktorandenprogramm(at)vhbonline(dot)org.

Abstract:

The course covers the basic elements of i) Markovian models of stochastic systems and ii) Markovian decision processes plus some basic elements of inventory theory. In this course, participants will learn how to construct and use these particular classes of probabilistic models of systems and decision processes. The defining feature of the Markovian models is the memoryless property of the underlying stochastic processes. It essentially states that the future behavior of a system depends only on its current state, but not its previous history. The participants will learn why and how this often makes it possible to determine the probabilities of the different system states and how these probabilities can then be used to determine performance measures of the system or to assign economic values to decisions made in an uncertain environment.

Content

We will start by describing the defining features and variants of stochastic processes, focusing on those processes with a discrete state space. We will initially cover Markovian processes in discrete time as their modeling and analysis happens to be straightforward, clear and illustrative. On this basis, we will then address Markovian processes in continuous time, the so-called Markov Chains. We will describe Poisson processes, the famous memoryless property of the exponential distribution and derive the necessary and sufficient balance equations for the steady-state analysis of Markov Chains in continuous time. The participants will install and use Scilab, an free and open-source software for numerical computation (www.scilab.org), on their machines to perform numerical experiments and solve small exercises.

Based on this foundation, we will then address the analysis of Markovian queuing systems and show how to determine the probability of having a given number of customers or jobs in the system or the queue. After introducing and explaining Little’s Law, we will use it to determine expected waiting or cycle times. Closing this introduction to queuing models, we will briefly explain and demonstrate Kingman’s approximation for the expected waiting time G/G/1 and G/G/N queueing model.

In the next section, we will briefly cover basic elements of the probabilistic analysis of inventory systems. We will introduce the classical newsvendor problem and use it to explain and apply the first order loss function for the case of normally distributed demand.

The next part of the course will be devoted to stochastic (dynamic) programming, also known as stochastic decision processes. Starting with a finite-horizon deterministic setting, we will treat the basic version of Bellman’s recursion equation and explain its usage to determine an optimal course of actions in a multi-stage decision situation. On this foundation, we will next consider the stochastic case of a finite-horizon Markovian Decision Process in discrete time, explain the optimality equations and their solution via the backward induction algorithm. Finally, we will consider the infinite-horizon, continuous time case of discounted Markov decision processes and the value and policy iteration algorithms to determine policies that are optimal in expectation.

On the fourth day, we will consider a linkage between stochastic modeling and optimization by treating two-stage linear programs using scenario techniques. Here we will use the GAMS modeling system to essentially embed a numerical simulation within an (formally deterministic) linear or mixed-integer linear optimization program. We will furthermore discuss either (and preferably) current research projects of the participants that involve probabilistic modeling or (alternatively) some interesting papers showing the methodologies taught in the course.

Further information

VHB ProDok: Qualitative Research Methods

Institution: VHB ProDok

Lecturer: Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Georg Schreyögg (Freie Universität Berlin) & Prof. Dr. Jana Costas (Europa-Universität Viadrina, Frankfurt (Oder))

Date: 21. – 24. März 2017

Place:
Harnack-Haus
Tagungsstätte der Max-Planck-Gesellschaft
Ihnestr. 16-20
14195 Berlin
http://www.harnackhaus-berlin.mpg.de/

Registration: Kurs ist ausgebucht. Warteliste für spätere Kurse möglich. Bitte nutzen Sie das Anmeldeformular oder senden Sie eine Email an doktorandenprogramm(at)vhbonline(dot)org.

Abstract:
Dieser Kurs wendet sich an NachwuchswissenschaftlerInnen der Betriebswirtschaftslehre, die in ihrer Forschung qualitative Methoden einsetzen wollen. Grundlegendes Ziel dieses Kurses ist es, den Teilnehmern methodische Grundlagen und weitergehende Kenntnisse in der qualitativen Managementforschung zu vermitteln. Nach Besuch des Kurses sind die Teilnehmer in der Lage,

  • methodologische Grundlagen zu verstehen und verschiedene Methoden der qualitativen Forschung zu unterscheiden, einzuordnen und auszuwählen;
  • Ziele und Einsatzzwecke, sowie Stärken und Schwächen qualitativer Forschung einzuschätzen;
  • Schlüsselfragen der Planung und Vorbereitung, des Forschungsdesigns, der Datensammlung und der Analyse zu stellen und zu verstehen;
  • Kernprobleme während der Planung, Durchführung, Analyse und Niederschrift qualitativer Studien zu identifizieren, zu analysieren und mit diesen umzugehen;
  • gute qualitative Managementforschung von schlechter zu unterscheiden.

Further information