1. The Power of the Comparative Historical Method By Johann Peter Murmann August 5, 2005

2. Introduction 1.False Dichotomy: Quantitative vs Qualitative Research 2.True Dichotomy: Theory Development vs Theory Verification (Testing) 3.The Historical Comparative Method is Particularly Useful for Developing Theories 4.Theories are Always Work in Progress 5.Theory Development Example: Causes of Competitive Advantage in the Global Synthetic Dye Industry, 1857- 1914.

3. Market Share U. S. Britain GermanySwitzerlandFranceOther British and French Firms are the Leaders in Dye Industry in 1862

4. Market Share U. S. Britain GermanySwitzerlandFranceOther German Firms are Leaders in the Dye Industry in 1873

5. Market Share U. S. Britain GermanySwitzerlandFranceOther German Firms Dominate World Dye Industry in 1913

6. How did I proceed (I) Read the literature in management, sociology, and economics concerned with theories of competitive advantage Wanted to see how much evolutionary theory could explain a long-term shift in competitive advantage of a science-based industry Read all histories of the dye and chemical industry & biographies of leading industrialists and chemists Collected a dataset of 379 firms and plants from 1857-1914 that could discriminate between different theories of competitive advantage Collected data on national institutional environment in five different countries

7. How did I proceed (II) Developed a theory of coevolution Had to induce the precise causal mechanisms that were responsible for coevolution I am not done, what are the next steps? Developing a general hypothesis Checking whether the theory works in other contexts Quantifying the relative causal importance of different factors

8. Global Share of Organic Chemistry Publications 1852186218771907 Germany29%38%50-67%35-47% France35%23%15.2%12.2% Britain24%23%5.9%16.2% United States0.9%3.6% Switzerland7.4-24%5.0-17%

9. 4. Definition of Coevolution Two evolving populations coevolve if and only if they have a significant causal impact on each other’s ability to persist

10. Specific Mechanisms of Coevolution? IndustryAcademia ? ?

11. The Three Bidirectional Causal Mechanisms 1.Exchange of personnel 2.Commercial ties 3.Lobbying for each other Magnitude of Bidirectional Flows Germany > Switzerland > Britain> France > U.S.

12. Explanation of Symbols Used in Presentation Academic discipline in particular country Industrial sector in particular country Academic-industrial complexes GermanyFrance SwitzerlandUnited States Britain

13. Organic Chemistry in Different Countries Weak Academic Discipline Strong Weak Industrial Sector Strong 1850 GermanyFrance SwitzerlandUnited States Britain No synthetic dye industry existed before 1857

14. Co-Evolution in the Synthetic Dye Industry Weak Academic Discipline Strong Weak Industrial Sector Strong 1860 GermanyFrance SwitzerlandUnited States Britain

15. Co-Evolution in the Synthetic Dye Industry Weak Academic Discipline Strong Weak Industrial Sector Strong 1870 GermanyFrance SwitzerlandUnited States Britain

16. Co-Evolution in the Synthetic Dye Industry Weak Academic Discipline Strong Weak Industrial Sector Strong 1913 GermanyFrance SwitzerlandUnited States Britain

17. Other Cases I looked at Agriculture 1850-1914 Computer Software 1950-1996 Biotechnology 1973-2001 These cases seam to support the coevolutionary hypothesis.

18. General Hypothesis The relative strength of a national industry that has a significant input of academic knowledge is causally related to the strength of the academic discipline in the nation, and vice versa Because of competitive pressures, a nation cannot remain over long periods weak in one of these domains and strong in the other; the domains will become either both strong or both weak

19. Co-Evolution Processes at the National Level Weak Academic Discipline Strong Weak Industrial Sector Strong Time 1

20. Co-Evolution Processes at the National Level Weak Academic Discipline Strong Weak Industrial Sector Strong Time 2

21. Co-Evolution Processes at the National Level Weak Academic Discipline Strong Weak Industrial Sector Strong Time 3

22. Co-Evolution Processes at the National Level Weak Academic Discipline Strong Weak Industrial Sector Strong Time 4

23. Next steps developing and verifying coevolutionary theory 1. Synthetic Dye Industry, 1914-2004 Adding Japan, China, & India 2. Global Paper and Pulp Industry, 1850-2000 3.Testing the General Hypotheses

24. Supplementary Slides Not Used During Presentation

25. Comparative Historical Analyses Main Methodological Treatises in Sociology Stinchcombe, 1978; Tilly, 1984; Skocpol, 1984 Ragin, 1987; Mahoney & Rueschemeyer, 2003 Different Foci of Studies Historical epochs (Mokyr 1990) Countries (Landes 1969, McCraw 1997) Revolutions in different countries (Skocpol, 1979, Tilly, 1993) Managerial ideologies different countries (Bendix, 1956; Guillén, 1994) Specific industries in different countries (Dobbin, 1994, Arora, et al., 1998) Business groups in different countries (Guillén, 2001) Firms in different countries (Chandler, 1990; McCraw 1997)

26. Key Feature of the Comparative Historical Method Repeated dialogue between ideas and evidence to develop new theories Close fit between theories (concepts) and empirical reality Contexts matter: Same outcome can be produced by different causes Same cause in another context can produce different outcomes Comparing whole rather than parts Finding the factors that differ to extract causes of differences and similarities in outcomes.

27. The Historical Comparative Method is defined by a concern with causal analysis, an emphasis on process over time, and the use of systematic and contextualized comparisons Mahoney & Rueschemeyer, in Comparative Historical Analysis in the Social Sciences,2003, p.6

28. Main Methodological Treatises in Sociology Mahoney, J. & Rueschemeyer, D. 2003. Comparative historical analysis in the social sciences. New York: Cambridge University Press. Ragin, C. C. 1987. The Comparative Method: Moving Beyond Qualitative and Quantitative strategies. Berkeley: University of California Press. Skocpol, T. 1984. Vision and Method in Historical Sociology. New York: Cambridge University Press. Stinchcombe, A. L. 1978. Theoretical methods in social history. New York: Academic Press. Tilly, C. 1984. Big Structures, Large Processes, Huge Comparisons. New York: Russel Sage Foundation.

29. Examples of Comparative Historical Studies Arora, A., Landau, R., & Rosenberg, N. (Eds.). 1998. Chemicals and Long-Term Economic Growth: Insights from the Chemical Industry. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Bendix, R. 1956. Work and authority in industry; ideologies of management in the course of industrialization. New York,: Wiley. Chandler, A. D. 1990. Scale and Scope: The Dynamics of Industrial Capitalism. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Dobbin, F. 1994. Forging Industrial Policy: The United States, Britain and France in the Railway Age. New York: Cambridge University Press. Guillén, M. F. 1994. Models of Management: Work, Authority, and Organization in a Comparative Perspective. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Guillén, M. F. 2001. The limits of convergence: globalization and organizational change in Argentina, South Korea, and Spain. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

30. Examples of Comparative Historical Studies Landes, D. S. 1969. The Unbound Prometheus: technological change and industrial development in Western Europe from 1750 to the present. New York: Cambridge University Press. McCraw, T. K. (Ed.). 1997. Creating modern capitalism: how entrepreneurs, companies, and countries triumphed in three industrial revolutions. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. Mokyr, J. 1990. The Lever of Riches: Technological Creativity and Economic Progress. New York: Oxford University Press. Murmann, J. P. 2003. Knowledge and Competitive Advantage: The Coevolution of Firms, Technology, and National Institutions. New York: Cambridge University Press. Skocpol, T. 1979. States and social revolutions: a comparative analysis of France, Russia, and China. New York: Cambridge University Press. Tilly, C. 1993. European Revolutions 1492-1992. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell Publishers.