Introduction to Varieties of Capitalism Varieties of capitalism: The institutional foundations of comparative advantage (Vol. 8): Wiley Online Library.

By P. Hall, Dw Soskice. 2001

238 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/798e9c130badbc527b27527af5785752e0da4f14

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Citations in the corpus

Asian Business Systems: Institutional Comparison, Clusters, and Implications for Varieties of Capitalism and Business Systems Theory (2013, methodology): “We structured our comparison around the key dimensions suggested in four major models of comparative institutional analysis: Whitley (1992, 1999); Hall and Soskice (2001), augmented by the critical evaluation by Hancké, Rhodes, and Thatcher (2007); Amable (2003); and Redding (2005).”
What Connects Industrial Relations and Corporate Governance? Explaining Institutional Complementarity (2005, background): “…Streeck 1991), company finance (as distinguished from company monitoring), cooperation between firms in standard setting and technology transfer (Hall and Soskice 2001), management careers (Lane 1992), the rules of company decision-making, such as CEO power and veto points inside management,…”
What's on the path? Path dependence, organizational diversity and the problem of institutional change in the US economy, 1900-1950 (2007, background): “And it appears among comparativists, who have found it theoretically compelling or analytically useful to characterize national economies in terms of their dominant or central organizing tendencies, culminating in characterizations of the US as an institutionally thin system of markets and hierarchi”
Classification situations: Life-chances in the neoliberal era (2013, unknown): “We also expect conﬁgurations of classiﬁca-tory institutions in different societies to display similarities and complementarities among themselves (DiMaggio & Powell, 1983; Hall & Soskice, 2001).”
Institutional coherence and macroeconomic performance (2006, methodology): “A complementarity exists when ‘the presence (or efficiency) of one institution increases the returns from (or efficiency of) the other’ (Hall and Soskice, 2001, p. 17).”
The Importance of Employment Protection for Skill Development in Coordinated Market Economies (2007, background): “In contrast, the varieties of capitalism (VOC) literature has argued that both CMEs and LMEs represent viable economic paradigms (Hall and Soskice, 2001; Whitley, 1999), but with different kinds of industry performing better in different national contexts.”
Capitalist diversity and diversity within capitalism (2009, background): “Nations characterized by specific institutions and practices in one area will have incentives to develop complementary practices in others (Hall & Soskice, 2001, p. 18).”
International HRM: national business systems, organizational politics and the international division of labour in MNCs (2005, background): “Conversely, in systems where interfirm labour mobility is high and unconstrained by industrial relations institutions, firms are likely to be reluctant to devote significant resources to training and development (see Hall and Soskice, 2001: 33–44).”
The “creative class” in the uk: an initial analysis (2008, background): “…Europe share many common values and institutions, there are aspects of their respective societal development that show strong divergence; for example, with regard to political priorities, functioning of labour markets, economic growth processes and social outcomes (see e.g. Hall and Soskice 2001).”
The social order of markets (2009, background): “…and stabilizing markets, some authors associated with the institutional approach exhibit an affinity to comparative political economy, and its attribution of different national strategies of firms to the specific institutional structures of national economies (Hall and Soskice 2001: 4ff).”
The varieties of capitalism paradigm: not enough variety? (2004, background): “As these institutions, and, hence, opportunities,differ between countries—or at least between groups of countries [Hall and Soskice (2001) distinguish between ‘coordinated market economies’, or CMEs such as Germany and Sweden, and ‘liberal market economies’, or LMEs such as the USA and the…”