IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/ozechr/v54y2014i2p164-182.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Evolution of a Socially Committed Business Group in Colombia, 1911–85

Author

Listed:
  • María Inés Barbero
  • Andrea Lluch
  • Carlos Dávila
  • José Camilo Dávila

Abstract

type="main"> This article examines the historical path of a century-old business group – Fundación Social – in an ‘emerging society’ in Latin America (Colombia) in terms of strategy, top management structure, and governance. Conducted within the grounded theory methodology and relying on broad empirical data, the article identifies a series of issues that emerge from the Fundación Social's history. It offers opportunities for dialogue and comparison with scholars in at least two fields: corporate social responsibility and business groups.

Suggested Citation

  • María Inés Barbero & Andrea Lluch & Carlos Dávila & José Camilo Dávila, 2014. "The Evolution of a Socially Committed Business Group in Colombia, 1911–85," Australian Economic History Review, Economic History Society of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 54(2), pages 164-182, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:ozechr:v:54:y:2014:i:2:p:164-182
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/aehr.12043
    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.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alfred D. Chandler, 1992. "Organizational Capabilities and the Economic History of the Industrial Enterprise," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 6(3), pages 79-100, Summer.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Gamal Atallah, 2002. "Production Technology, Information Technology, and Vertical Integration Under Asymmetric Information," Working Papers 0203EClassification-JEL: , University of Ottawa, Department of Economics.
    2. Kim, Sukkoo, 1999. "The Rise of Multiunit Firms in U.S. Manufacturing," Explorations in Economic History, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 360-386, October.
    3. Jackie Krafft, 2006. "Business history and the organization of industry," Post-Print hal-00211780, HAL.
    4. Johannes Boehm & Swati Dhingra & John Morrow, 2022. "The Comparative Advantage of Firms," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 130(12), pages 3025-3100.
    5. Sanjaya Lall, 1996. "Understanding Technology Development," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Learning from the Asian Tigers, chapter 2, pages 27-58, Palgrave Macmillan.
    6. Jean-Luc Gaffard, 2003. "Coordination, marché et organisation. Essai sur l'efficacité et la stabilité des économies de marché," Revue de l'OFCE, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 85(2), pages 235-270.
    7. Klaus Rathe & Ulrich Witt, 2001. "The Nature of the Firm – Static versus Developmental Interpretations," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 5(3), pages 331-351, September.
    8. Christos Pitelis, 2022. "Big tech and platform-enabled multinational corporate capital(ism): the socialisation of capital, and the private appropriation of social value," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 46(6), pages 1243-1268.
    9. Chivu, Luminita, 2019. "The Puzzle of Industrial Enterprises in Romania over a Century: 1918-2017," Working Papers of National Institute for Economic Research 191018, Institutul National de Cercetari Economice (INCE).
    10. Joost Veenstra & Herman de Jong, 2015. "A Tale of Two Tails: Plant Size Variation and Comparative Labor Productivity in U.S. and German Manufacturing in the Early 20th Century," CEH Discussion Papers 032, Centre for Economic History, Research School of Economics, Australian National University.
    11. Andrew Atkeson & Patrick J. Kehoe, 2002. "The transition to a new economy after the Second Industrial Revolution," Proceedings, Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, issue Nov.
    12. Jean-Luc Gaffard & Sarah Guillou & Lionel Nesta, 2012. "R&D and Industrial Policy: Policies to Coordinate Investments in Research under Radical Uncertainty," Chapters, in: Michael Dietrich & Jackie Krafft (ed.), Handbook on the Economics and Theory of the Firm, chapter 35, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    13. Alain Asquin & R. Moore, 2003. "Trajectories, Strategic Formulas and Contingencies : pathways to entrepreneurial success," Post-Print halshs-00688892, HAL.
    14. Giovanni Dosi & Richard Nelson, 2013. "The Evolution of Technologies: An Assessment of the State-of-the-Art," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 3(1), pages 3-46, June.
    15. Andrew Atkeson & Patrick J. Kehoe, 2007. "Modeling the Transition to a New Economy: Lessons from Two Technological Revolutions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(1), pages 64-88, March.
    16. KELLY A. Day & GEORGE B. Frisvold, 1993. "Medical Research And Genetic Resources Management: The Case Of Taxol," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 11(3), pages 1-11, July.
    17. Wang, Sen & Bogle, Tim & van Kooten, G. Cornelis, 2012. "Forestry and the New Institutional Economics," Working Papers 130818, University of Victoria, Resource Economics and Policy.
    18. Olivier E. Malay, 2021. "How to Articulate Beyond GDP and Businesses’ Social and Environmental Indicators?," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 155(1), pages 1-25, May.
    19. Li Hongchang & Kuang Xujuan, 2015. "Innovation of Express Freight Product for Chinese Railways," Journal of Systems Science and Information, De Gruyter, vol. 3(1), pages 1-13, February.
    20. Coriat, Benjamin & Weinstein, Olivier, 2002. "Organizations, firms and institutions in the generation of innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 273-290, February.

    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:bla:ozechr:v:54:y:2014:i:2:p:164-182. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/oznzsea.html .

    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.