Search

This article discusses anonymizing elite interviewees. Based on our experiences with interviewing professional elites and ultra-elites in different research projects, we describe how the types of conflicts involving analysis and publication change when interviewees are not promised anonymity. We discuss how contextualizing the elite positions of anonymized interviewees becomes increasingly difficult in interviews with persons who hold prestigious positions of authority and are interviewed in their official capacity. Masking interviewees can create conflicts with regard to the researcher's presentation of results, the transparency of the research and the ability of interviewees to talk back. We show how working with non-anonymized interviewees -- and even using excerpts from interviews on public radio -- can be an option in qualitative research. However, non-anonymized interviews with elites should be considered only in some instances and may seriously hamper the validity of the material in other cases.

Utilising a unique and original dataset on the board composition of the 35 largest German chemical producers over the 1950–2015 period, the article tracks the entire lifespan of the industry's reconstituted board interlock network. Regarding the network as a mechanism for controlling competition among its members, we consider changes in its strength over time. We find that a close-knit network came into existence in the 1950s, culminating in the 1970s and 1980s, after which it began to weaken. We highlight the importance of various meeting places for top-level directors from the chemical industry, including bank boards, and moreover introduce a novel measure that makes it possible to consider the significance of past ties to the strength of the network. Situating the findings in a wider political-economic context, we suggest that in important respects Germany's coordinated form of capitalism is likely to have been even more coordinated than has been recognised. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Career narratives among the Danish power elite often include the facilitating presence of an elite superior. We explore the role patrons play in the mobility narratives of the Danish power elite. Drawing from a highly select group identified in the core of elite networks, we interviewed 37 individuals selected for maximal variation in career paths, networks and positions within the power elite. We referenced the concept of patrimonialism to understand the relations between patrons and protégés in building an elite career and develop a typology identifying three kinds of patrimonial relations described by elites, intra-organizational relations to mentors and patriarchs and inter-organizational relations to sponsors. We then empirically explore the three types of patrimonial relations. Finally, we argue that each of these patrimonial relations reinforce elite cohesion, even in the supposedly critical case of good governance in Denmark. Hence, patrimonial relations present a crucial perspective for understanding contemporary power structures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this contribution, we introduce 'career hubs' as an alternative to interlocking directorates and propose to study transnational corporate elite networks with this new concept. Career hubs, the most frequent common career organizations, put emphasis on knowledge brokering and allow us to study a larger variety of organizations to understand the form and the spread of elite networks. We use a sample of 1366 firms on the Forbes 2000 list of 2018 and investigate the careers of 16,500 top executives by linking these data to the BoardEx database. We find three types of career hubs: global audit and consulting firms, financial firms participating in a transatlantic banking alliance and large US consumer goods conglomerates – and highlight the mechanisms through which they shape the spatial structures of finance led capitalism. In the conclusion, we consider the implication of our results for the literature on corporate networks and propose a series of future research avenues in the career hub perspective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article discusses anonymizing elite interviewees. Based on our experiences with interviewing professional elites and ultra-elites in different research projects, we describe how the types of conflicts involving analysis and publication change when interviewees are not promised anonymity. We discuss how contextualizing the elite positions of anonymized interviewees becomes increasingly difficult in interviews with persons who hold prestigious positions of authority and are interviewed in their official capacity. Masking interviewees can create conflicts with regard to the researcher's presentation of results, the transparency of the research and the ability of interviewees to talk back. We show how working with non-anonymized interviewees – and even using excerpts from interviews on public radio – can be an option in qualitative research. However, non-anonymized interviews with elites should be considered only in some instances and may seriously hamper the validity of the material in other cases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

What is the relationship between the various forms of power held by elites in contemporary society? Using Bourdieu's notion of the field of power, we address this question by exploring the division of labour of domination among contemporary Danish elites. Via a specific multiple correspondence analysis of 44 variables with 198 categories, we examine the relationship between the volume and distribution of various forms of capital held by 423 individuals at the core of Danish elite networks, arguing that they constitute effective agents in the field of power. We find three major differentiations between: (1) established and newcomers; (2) public and private forms of legitimation; and (3) rural or industrial-based, but nonetheless organisationally well connected, elites and the social elite surrounding Copenhagen state nobility. The legitimising pole of the field of power does not necessarily derive its positions from the cultural field but can also rely on delegated forms of capital. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Økonomi & Politik is the property of Djøf Forlag and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)