In defence of business history: A reply to Taylor, Bell and Cooke

Abstract

The article offers a defence of business history and responds to the suggestion from Taylor et al. (2009) that it should engage more with reflexive historiography and in particular with the work of the continental philosopher, Paul Ricoeur.We argue that such an engagement would not be helpful to business history in general, and would not address the specific issue of business history's isolation from management and organisation studies.To explain why, the article uses examples from literatures in business history, general history and historiography. It concludes that although business history's achievements are significant, they are predominantly empirical and to engage more with management and organization studies, it is necessary for business history to use a wider range of perspectives to become more theoretically informed.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 42 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.