A History of Organizational Change : The case of Fédération Internationale de l'Automobile (FIA), 1946–2020 /: The case of Fédération Internationale de l'Automobile (FIA), 1946–2020. (2020)

• Record Type: Book
• Further Information: Note: Hans Erik Næss.
• Authors: Næss, Hans Erik
• Contents: Chapter 1: Introduction – the FIA, and the analytical framework Less known than the FIFA and the IOC, the FIA nevertheless share with them several characteristics as an organisation. To provide the reader with an introduction to the FIA and its reach, and to this project as a whole, chapter one will address the current state of the FIA and why a book like this is a contribution to this field. Existing literature about the FIA and its place in the landscape of ISAs will be reviewed, and the research framework, data and methods, which this book builds upon, will be unfolded. First, I will provide a backdrop of the formation of the FIA in 1945 with reference to the role of the car industry, the development of championships (Grand Prix), and the commercialisation of motorsport. Notable episodes include the formation of Commission Sportive Internationale (CSI) in 1922, and the establishment of the European Drivers' Championship in 1931. Second, I will introduce the theoretical and methodological framework of this book. To analyse the FIA's development, historical sociology is used as point of departure. Skocpol (1984, p. 1) argues that researchers this field have four characteristics: first, they ask questions about social structures and processes understood to be concretely situated in time and space. Second, they address processes over time, and take temporal sequences seriously in accounting for outcomes. Third, these analyses attend to the interplay of meaningful actions and structural contexts, and finally, this kind of studies highlight the particular and varying features of specific kinds of social structures and patterns of change. To analyse these processes, and the relation between structure and agency, it is relevant to continue with how organisational practices and structures are often either reflections of, or responses to, rules, beliefs and conventions built into the wider society (Powell & Colyvas, 2007, p. 975). For ISAs, this applies with regard to 'elaboration of fields in terms of power, status, and history of institutions and the effects on organizations' (Washington & Patterson, 2011, p. 9). While early research within this framework focused on three mechanisms of organisational change through institutional isomorphism – coercive, normative and mimetic mechanisms (DiMaggio & Powell, 1983) – and thus rewarding conformity (at least within an organisational field), recent theoretical ventures draw attention to how organisations have changed in more diverse ways – acknowledging both homogenisation and divergence – because of external pressure and internal entrepreneurship (Beckert, 2010). A key analytical task in that respect is to investigate how 'stakeholder salience' is related to the cumulative number of stakeholder attributes – power, legitimacy and urgency – perceived by managers to be present (Mitchell, Agle, & Wood, 1997, p. 873; Neville, Bell & Whitwell, 2011) and to identify the relative importance of stakeholders as the FIA grows as an organisation. These stakeholder relations are shaping as well as are being shaped by institutional logics, – that is, 'a set of material practices and symbolic constructions – which constitutes its organizing principles and which is available to organizations and individuals to elaborate' (Friedland & Alford, 1991, p. 248). However, with increasing engagement beyond sports a plurality of such logics has emerged among ISAs, such as the FIA, creating hybrid organisations that are not merely non-profit or profit-based, neither neutral nor political, and transparent and secluded at the same time. Drawing upon Skelcher and Smith's (2015) theorisation of hybridity and institutional logics, the manifestations of the latter within the FIA, in different eras, thus has to approached in an exploratory way. Most notably, this approach replaces rational choice behaviour affiliated with new institutionalism with a refined version of Giddens' (1986) theory of structuration, as 'decisions and outcomes are a result of the interplay between individual agency and institutional structure' (Thornton & Ocasio, 2008, p. 103). And rather than following new institutional theory in separating the symbolic, the structural, and the cognitive dimensions of institutions, institutional logics integrate them based on ideas of 'embedded agency'. Consequently, 'institutional logic' has become a more flexible approach to grasp why institutional characteristics are enabling and constraining agency at the same time. As advised by Thornton and Ocasio (2008, p. 115) the development of the FIA will be analysed through four mechanisms of change: institutional entrepreneurs, structural overlap, event sequencing, and competing institutional logics. The rest of the proposed outline give some examples of incidents, processes and people that will be relevant to investigate in this context. Chapter 2: Early expansion: 1945-1967 As the FIA after the Second World War acquired new members, so did its responsibilities in terms of governance. The search for new members outside of Europe (or inside, as with former communist countries) in particular was troubled by political circumstances (making it difficult for Germany, a big automotive actor, to remain a member of the FIA) as well as the need to incorporate changes in consumer society, in which the car took on a prominent role. Simultaneously, the FIA established in 1950 what was to become the most popular motorsport championship in the future: Formula 1. With that, debates and quarrels about regulations began almost immediately. Although mostly ran by privateers in its first decade of racing, Formula 1 teams became a force to be reckoned with in terms of negotiating with the FIA on the essentials of the sport. Not least did Bernie Ecclestone, a 1960s-race team owner in Formula 1 and a person whose institutional entrepreneurship on the FIA will be explored in detail in following chapters, begin to assess the opportunity to transform the poorly organized and commercially sclerotic F1 into a full-fledged spectacle. Hence, the FIA experienced growing pains in its attempts to cater to old and new stakeholders – in other words, reconciling different institutional logics with the same solution as faced with issues in the past. Explaining his decision not to stand for the renewal of his mandate, FIA President 1958-1963 Count Hadelin de Liedekerke Beaufort expressed it honestly at the General Assembly, 14 October 1963: 'The FIA may rejoice in the fact that the tasks which lay before it is now more important than ever, that its membership are increasing on a par with the progress of motorization in the new Continents. There the FIA finds a justification of its efforts, but it must also perceive the opportunity for new tasks, and perhaps for some reorganizing.' Before he ended with passing on the presidency to someone 'with longer prospects before him, or more knowledgeable of the new circumstances of modern life'. Subsequently, these issues were addressed by the new FIA President, Italian Prince Caracciolo – the only candidate – in his acceptance speech at the very same meeting. With reference to difficulties of a general character, such as 'the transition period the automobile world is going through' and the acceptance of member countries whose needs 'are totally different from those of other countries', the new FIA president saw it as inevitable that the FIA needed to 'undergo deep changes'. To underpin this argument, Prince Caracciolo emphasised more peculiar changes related to sport: 'our Federation – and this is its pride, its title of glory, which we must certainly never deny – our Federation was born from Sport and, especially in the beginning, it had an entirely sporting outlook. However, compared with other domains of the automobile, one must say that sport no longer ranks first'. And while he added that 'while trying to retain impetus, the enthusiasm which were typical of sport, we must become fully adapted to modern times and realise that we have other tasks before us.' These views were both correct and misleading at the same time. Although it was true that the FIA was to be involved in issues that was not part of its original mandate, such as the environmental impact of cars, the sporting part of motoring was growing, not fading – something that is even underlined in the official report on FIA activities 1962-63, where it is doubtful that the sporting public, due to the growing number of events, classes and series, 'can have a really clear or comprehensive view of the position of competitors, during the season'. This inconsistency would later recoil as Prince Caracciolo strongly advocated a FIA that should no longer be considered 'a meeting between friends where general directives are elaborated, but rather as a driving instrument for the execution of our programme. We must therefore try to reinforce our central mechanism'. Exactly how the FIA should operationalize this outlook, apart from relying on the cooperation from its existing members and the inclusion of new ones like Senegal and Malaysia, was however more difficult to agree upon. For example, records document disagreements between Alliance Internationale de Tourisme (AIT), an international federation of motoring organisations, and the FIA, as the former wanted to establish its own technical commission within Organisation mondiale du tourisme et de l'automobile (OTA), established in 1950. Prince Caracciolo retorted to this claim by underlining that threats to the FIA's authority had to be dealt with immediately, as 'our strictest duty is to make our Federation the most powerful and efficient possible'. The question was how? Chapter 3: Into the modern era: 1967-1985 In the late 1960s, other ISAs like the IOC and the FIFA were becoming entangled with politics and commerce on new levels. Although not fully aware of it, the FIA now belonged
• Publisher Details: Cham : Palgrave Macmillan
• Publication Date: 2020
• Copyright Date: 2020
• Extent: 1 online resource (293 pages)
• Subjects: Business; Management science; Organization; Planning; Automobile industry and trade; Corporate governance; Business & Economics -- Industries -- Automobile Industry; Business & Economics -- Corporate Governance; Manufacturing industries; Corporate governance; Business & Economics -- Strategic Planning; Organizational theory & behaviour
• Languages: English
• ISBNs: 9783030482701
• Related ISBNs: 9783030482695
• Access Rights: Legal Deposit; Only available on premises controlled by the deposit library and to one user at any one time; The Legal Deposit Libraries (Non-Print Works) Regulations (UK).
• Access Usage: Restricted: Printing from this resource is governed by The Legal Deposit Libraries (Non-Print Works) Regulations (UK) and UK copyright law currently in force.