This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Schumpeter and the Obsolescence of the Entrepreneur

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Richard N. Langlois (University of Connecticut)

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

The English-language literature of technological change is one of the few areas of economic writing in which Joseph Schumpeter has maintained a following and in which he has been accorded some modicum of the attention he deserves. There has grown up within this literature a standard interpretation of Schumpeter's famous assertion that progress will eventually come to be 'mechanized'. The conventional wisdom goes something like this. The argument in Schumpeter's early writings by which writers invariably mean the 1934 English translation of The Theory of Economic Development -- is really quite different from that in Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy. There are, in effect, two Schumpeters: an 'early' Schumpeter and a 'later' Schumpeter. It was the former who believed in the importance of bold entrepreneurs, while the latter envisaged their demise and replacement by a bureaucratized mode of economic organization. Moreover, the reason Schumpeter changed his views is that he was reacting to the historical development of capitalism as he saw it taking place around him. As he moved from the world of owner-managed firms in early twentieth-century Europe to the world of large American corporations in the 1930s and 1940s, his opinions changed appropriately.

The paper attempts to make two points. The first is that, as a doctrinal matter, the 'two Schumpeters' thesis, as it is understood in the Anglo-American literature on technological change, is clearly wrong. Equally wrong is the idea that the fundamentals of Schumpeter's thought on entrepreneurship were influenced importantly by any observation of large firms in the United States after 1931. Schumpeter's ideas were remarkably consistent from at least 1926 (five years before he came to the U. S.) until his death. The obsolescence thesis speaks to a distinction between early capitalism and later capitalism, perhaps, but not to an earlier and later Schumpeter. The second, and more important, point is that the obsolescence thesis is wrong. It rests on a confusion -- or perhaps a bait-and-switch -- between two quite different kinds of economic knowledge.

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help file. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://www.econ.uconn.edu/working/2002-19.pdf
File Format: application/pdf
File Function: Full text
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by University of Connecticut, Department of Economics in its series Working papers with number 2002-19.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML, plain text, BibTeX, RIS (EndNote), ReDIF
Length: 29 pages
Date of creation: Aug 2002
Date of revision:
Publication status: Forthcoming in Advances in Austrian Economics
Handle: RePEc:uct:uconnp:2002-19

Contact details of provider:
Postal: University of Connecticut 341 Mansfield Road, Unit 1063 Storrs, CT 06269-1063
Phone: (860) 486-4889
Fax: (860) 486-4463
Web page: http://www.econ.uconn.edu/
More information through EDIRC

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Christian Zimmermann).

Related research
Keywords:

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

Cited by:
(explanations, Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.)
  1. Federica Saliola & Antonello Zanfei, 2007. "Multinational firms, global value chains and the organization of technology transfer," Working Papers 0710, University of Urbino Carlo Bo, Department of Economics, revised Mar 2007. [Downloadable!]
Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? Over 800 institutions contribute their bibliographic data directly to this service.

This page was last updated on 2008-5-5.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.