IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/indcch/v19y2010i2p509-548.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The rise and decline of managerial development

Author

Listed:
  • Peter Cappelli

Abstract

Alfred D. Chandler's work highlighted the complicated interplay between markets and firms, especially the arrangements created by firms to buffer and manage market forces. Arguably his most important work examines one aspect of firms, organizational structure, and how it changed in response to the competitive needs of growing businesses. Much the same approach can be applied to understanding other aspects of firms such as the structure of the most important jobs in corporations, executive positions, and how those positions have been filled over time. Here the interplay includes a different market, the labor market. The arguments that follow trace the evolution of executive roles from the early days of corporations, where executive jobs were largely shaped by the labor market, to internalized and bureaucratized arrangements consistent with the idea of an integrated "Chandlerian" firm after the 1950s, back to something much closer to the market-dominated approach following the 1982 recession. In large measure, the change seems driven by the different context that business faced and the interplay with labor markets that made internal development more difficult. The implications for the future of large-scale Chandlerian firms may be considerable. Copyright 2010 The Author 2010. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Associazione ICC. All rights reserved., Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Peter Cappelli, 2010. "The rise and decline of managerial development," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 19(2), pages 509-548, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:indcch:v:19:y:2010:i:2:p:509-548
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/icc/dtq006
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:indcch:v:19:y:2010:i:2:p:509-548. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/icc .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.