IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/mpifgd/1613.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Diversified quality production revisited the transformation of production systems and regulatory regimes in Germany

Author

Listed:
  • Sorge, Arndt
  • Streeck, Wolfgang

Abstract

We revisit the concept of Diversified Quality Production (DQP), which we introduced about thirty years ago. Our purpose is to examine the extent to which the concept can still be considered tenable for describing and explaining the development of the interaction between the political economy and concepts of production, notably in Germany. First, we show why and in which ways DQP was more heterogeneous than we had originally understood. Then, on the basis of evidence with respect to political, business, and economic changes in Germany, we show that DQP Mark I, a regime by and large characteristic of the 1980s, turned into DQP Mark II. In the process, major "complementarities" disappeared between the late 1980s and now - mainly the complementarity between production modes on the one hand and industrial relations and economic regulation on the other. While the latter exhibit greater change, business strategies and production organization show more continuity, which helps explain how Germany maintained economic performance after the mid-2000s, more than other countries in Europe. Conceptually, our most important result is that the complementarities emphasized in political economy are historically relative and limited, so that they should not be postulated as stable configurations.

Suggested Citation

  • Sorge, Arndt & Streeck, Wolfgang, 2016. "Diversified quality production revisited the transformation of production systems and regulatory regimes in Germany," MPIfG Discussion Paper 16/13, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:mpifgd:1613
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/148608/1/873828569.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Venohr, Bernd & Meyer, Klaus E., 2007. "The German miracle keeps running: How Germany's hidden champions stay ahead in the global economy," Working Papers 30, Berlin School of Economics and Law, Institute of Management Berlin (IMB).
    2. Anke Hassel, 1999. "The Erosion of the German System of Industrial Relations," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 37(3), pages 483-505, September.
    3. Herrigel, Gary, 2015. "Globalization and the German industrial production model," Journal for Labour Market Research, Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), Nürnberg [Institute for Employment Research, Nuremberg, Germany], vol. 48(2), pages 133-149.
    4. James G. March, 1991. "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 71-87, February.
    5. Gary Herrigel, 2015. "Globalization and the German industrial production model [Globalisierung und das deutsche Modell der Industrieproduktion]," Journal for Labour Market Research, Springer;Institute for Employment Research/ Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), vol. 48(2), pages 133-149, August.
    6. Herrigel, Gary, 2015. "Globalization and the German industrial production model," Journal for Labour Market Research, Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), Nürnberg [Institute for Employment Research, Nuremberg, Germany], vol. 48(2), pages 133-149.
    7. Sorge, Arndt, 2005. "The Global and the Local: Understanding the Dialectics of Business Systems," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199278909.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Raluca Zoltan & Romulus Vancea, 2022. "Taylorism and Ambidexterity – A Systemic Perspective on Integrating Exploration and Exploitation in Organizations," Ovidius University Annals, Economic Sciences Series, Ovidius University of Constantza, Faculty of Economic Sciences, vol. 0(1), pages 768-775, September.
    2. Beckert, Jens, 2017. "Die Historizität fiktionaler Erwartungen," MPIfG Discussion Paper 17/8, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    3. Guendalina Anzolin & Chiara Benassi & Armanda Cetrulo, 2024. "Industrial relations and firm-level innovation. A comparative analysis of establishment data in Germany and Italy," LEM Papers Series 2024/12, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    4. Helfen, Markus & Nicklich, Manuel & Sydow, Jörg, 2019. "Arbeitspolitische Verankerung des deutschen Windkraftanlagenbaus? Empirische Befunde zu ausgewählten Fallunternehmen [Embeddedness of German wind turbine manufacturers in industrial relations inst," Industrielle Beziehungen. Zeitschrift für Arbeit, Organisation und Management, Verlag Barbara Budrich, vol. 26(1), pages 35-62.
    5. Tomenendal, Matthias & Raffer, Christian, 2023. "Where do gazelles and high-growth firms occur in Germany?," BPS Working Paper Series 2, Berlin School of Economics and Law (HWR Berlin), Berlin Professional School (BPS).

    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. Matthias Brönner & Skander Salah & Markus Lienkamp, 2020. "Production Challenges in Least Developed Countries," Challenges, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-20, January.
    2. David Marsden, 2015. "The future of the German industrial relations model [Die Zukunft des deutschen Modells der Arbeitsbeziehungen]," Journal for Labour Market Research, Springer;Institute for Employment Research/ Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), vol. 48(2), pages 169-187, August.
    3. Niccolo Durazzi, 2023. "Engineering the expansion of higher education: High skills, advanced manufacturing, and the knowledge economy," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 17(1), pages 121-141, January.
    4. Zhengzheng Li & Zhongyang Sun & Kaihua Wang & Oana-Ramona Lobonț, 2024. "Symphony or Solo: Does Convergence Exist in Environmental Taxation among EU Countries?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(17), pages 1-21, September.
    5. Lechowski, Grzegorz & Krzywdzinski, Martin, 2022. "Emerging positions of German firms in the industrial internet of things: A global technological ecosystem perspective," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 22(4), pages 666-683.
    6. Butollo, Florian & Staritz, Cornelia, 2022. "Deglobalisierung, Rekonfiguration oder Business as Usual? COVID-19 und die Grenzen der Rückverlagerung globalisierter Produktion [Deglobalization, reconfiguration, or business as usual? COVID-19 an," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 32(3), pages 393-425.
    7. Butollo, Florian, 2021. "Digitalization and the geographies of production: Towards reshoring or global fragmentation?," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 25(2), pages 259-278.
    8. Henri A. Schildt & Markku V.J. Maula & Thomas Keil, 2005. "Explorative and Exploitative Learning from External Corporate Ventures," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 29(4), pages 493-515, July.
    9. Giuliani, Elisa & Martinelli, Arianna & Rabellotti, Roberta, 2016. "Is Co-Invention Expediting Technological Catch Up? A Study of Collaboration between Emerging Country Firms and EU Inventors," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 192-205.
    10. Insoo Cho & Peter F. Orazem, 2021. "How endogenous risk preferences and sample selection affect analysis of firm survival," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 56(4), pages 1309-1332, April.
    11. Son K. Lam & Thomas E. DeCarlo & Ashish Sharma, 2019. "Salesperson ambidexterity in customer engagement: do customer base characteristics matter?," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 47(4), pages 659-680, July.
    12. Bruneel, Johan & Clarysse, Bart & Bobelyn, Annelies & Wright, Mike, 2020. "Liquidity events and VC-backed academic spin-offs: The role of search alliances," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(10).
    13. Anne Corcos & Yorgos Rizopoulos, 2011. "Is prosocial behavior egocentric? The “invisible hand” of emotions," Post-Print halshs-01968213, HAL.
    14. Freeman, Steven F., 1997. "Good decisions : reconciling human rationality, evolution, and ethics," Working papers WP 3962-97., Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    15. Zhang, Feng & Jiang, Guohua & Cantwell, John A., 2015. "Subsidiary exploration and the innovative performance of large multinational corporations," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 224-234.
    16. Liu, Zhiqiang & Yan, Miao & Fan, Youqing & Chen, Liling, 2021. "Ascribed or achieved? The role of birth order on innovative behaviour in the workplace," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 480-492.
    17. Boeker, Warren & Howard, Michael D. & Basu, Sandip & Sahaym, Arvin, 2021. "Interpersonal relationships, digital technologies, and innovation in entrepreneurial ventures," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 495-507.
    18. Keegan, A. & Turner, J.R., 2000. "Quantity versus Quality in Project Based Learning Practices," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2000-55-ORG, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    19. Carolina Rojas-Córdova & Amanda J. Williamson & Julio A. Pertuze & Gustavo Calvo, 2023. "Why one strategy does not fit all: a systematic review on exploration–exploitation in different organizational archetypes," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 17(7), pages 2251-2295, October.
    20. Robert P. Garrett Jr. & Jeffrey G. Covin, 2015. "Internal Corporate Venture Operations Independence and Performance: A Knowledge–Based Perspective," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 39(4), pages 763-790, July.

    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:zbw:mpifgd:1613. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/mpigfde.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.