Sverre August Christensen

Et selskapsliv : Festskrift til Tore Bråthen s. 154-170

Historisk tidsskrift 102(3) s. 251-256 Doi: https://doi.org/10.18261/ht.102.3.13

Enterprise & Society Doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/eso.2023.19

This article aims to explain the considerable state ownership in listed companies in Norway (SOiN) at present. The extant literature has pointed to alleged national idiosyncrasies to explain this special feature of Norwegian capitalism. The main contribution of this article is a comparative perspective. It shows that most European countries have pursued selective protectionism (i.e., to secure national ownership in key companies). It also shows that financial capital was not crucial for selective protectionism. On this background, the article discusses why state ownership became the mode of selective protectionism in Norway. It argues that the main reason is that large private (often multinational) companies did not develop in the wake of the second Industrial Revolution. Another key reason is that a specific hybrid ownership model that was developed after 1945 became an available institutional solution for securing national ownership after 1990. A common ground and a compromise were found on this model, based both on trust and distrust toward the state: a trust in that the state could operate as a passive and private owner, and a corresponding distrust in the state as an active industrialist and owner.

Enterprise & Society 23(2) s. 512-547 Doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/eso.2020.66

This article examines the development of buyer-supplier relations in the telecom sector. The literature on telecoms in Scandinavia has been dominated by the narrative praising the trusting and collaborative relations between Telia, the Swedish public telephone operator (PTO), and Ericsson, the equipment supplier. The Norwegian PTO, Telenor, diverted from this path and was a pioneer in preferring competitive tenders and arm’s length relations with its suppliers starting in the 1970s. The article argues that Telenor’s history and nationality had a significant impact on its business strategy. In addition, the article examines why some business narratives persist while others remain unknown. One finding is that shareholder-friendly narratives have a handicap because they focus on self-interest and money, and not societal values.

Scandinavian Economic History Review s. 1-18 Doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/03585522.2020.1759680

The first globalisation, in the decades around 1900, was propelled by free-standing companies. This article discusses the establishment of a Norwegian free-standing company in Russia in 1910. It was the culmination of an eastwards movement from the Norwegian forest industry that went through Sweden and Finland before reaching Russia. The article discusses who controlled the company, and how this changed over time. It makes two main contributions to the literature. Firstly, how a family network can solve some of the puzzles free-standing companies have posed to theories of international business, especially regarding the origins and internalisation of ownership advantages. Secondly, it shows that, although free-standing companies were important for the first global economy, they were also integral to the deglobalization that followed.