|
My laudation speech should be called 'Praising combattants in the
line of organizational science'. Dear Cor, we have so many reasons
to admire and respect you.
At an age and with a status in our community which usually is
correlated with re-editing books published earlier in the career or
with delivering dull guest talks to scientific conferences and
honoris causa ceremonies, you are still creative as ever. You
suggest that life is possible after legal retirement. About one
fifth of your scientific production has been written once you had
retired.
Your modesty is exaggerated. When I called you to let you know
that EGOS would be honored to have you as a honorary member, you
gave me a rather reluctant approval. I anticipated that. You combine
the worst profiles a French may have to manage in human relations:
you are a Dutch citizen and you share a rather fundamentalist
Protestant approach to life. It is also frustrating: you have a
remarkable sense for humour French usually do not master. In fact,
your modesty is just one side of the coin. As it is rather often
expressed in my country, one should look at the other side of the
coin. Your modesty is a social construction of a culture. Therefore
I feel free not to follow the conventional style of a laudatio.
Why this honorary membership? Because we owe you much at two
levels: You have been a foundig father of the discipline in the
Netherlands, you have played a decisive role in helping EGOS to be
created and developed.
Cor Lammers is accustomed to play the role of a founding father.
He has been a pioneer in the development of modern (after World
War II) sociology in his native country, the Netherlands. His books
have become a major source of inspiration for what is one of the
most active and creative national communities in the field of
organization studies. He also has played an important role inside
EGOS right from the early days (early 1970s). More than just an
ordinary 'SuperEgo', he has given the moral and behavioral example
of how to dialogue – debate intellectually and interpersonally
between scholars. Part of the EGOS scientific agenda derives from
his advice and wisdom.
Born in 1928, Cornelis Jacobus Lammers was trained in sociology
at the University of Michigan and at the University of Amsterdam (PhD
in 1963). In 1964 he became professor of sociology at the University
of Leyden. 29 years later, he retired from the same university. As
suggested by his 'selected bibliography', he has authored and
co-authored 20 major books and about 75 articles in reviewed
journals, from the American Journal of Sociology and
Administrative Science Quarterly to Organization Studies.
In many ways Cor Lammers has become a legend. To some extent
there is a fit between him becoming a Honorary Member of EGOS in
Lyon and the theme of the colloquium, 'the odyssey of organizing'.
He has built bridges between national traditions, linguistic
barriers and competing paradigms. For instance, he has been
influenced by the US sociology of the 1950s, rather functionalist
oriented, while writing with Jacques van Doorn the book published in
1959 and called 'Moderne sociologie: Systematiek en analyse'.
Another well known example of this cross-breeding approach is the
article published by Organization Studies in 1990 and called 'Sociology
of organizations around the globe. Similarities and differences
between American, French, British, German and Dutch brands'. On and
on, Cor has been in line with the stereotype of how we perceive
Dutch colleagues: a local scholar with a cosmopolitan opening. He
has remained faithful to his academic career in the Netherlands. But
he practices international eclectism. Such a skill is not just
something he keeps for himself or he uses as a mundane asset. He
reads and knows in depth what is written in many countries. And he
is able to integrate the various contributions into a systematic as
well as a historic framework.
He covers general sociology as well as sociology of organizations.
Every contribution made by Cor always tries to link a thesis picked
in the middle level theories and an original set of empirical data.
He reminds us about the fact that, while organizations studies have
to generate new knowledge, scholars have not to rediscover the wheel,
which means that scientific culture, or knowing the past
contributors (past meaning more than 10 or 20 years ago), provides
an essential incentive to creativity. He has been and remains a
sharp critic of what he considers as not been rigorous enough or as
been too much fad-driven research. He goes on reminding us that
there are historic roots to our domains and that some cumulative
development is part of scientific excellence. Cor really is
interested in tracking the development of a discipline, sociology of
organizations, which he believes has a core, a common backbone,
robust and clearly defined.
This suggests that Cor does not show too much enthusiasm for
non-Kantian philosophy as far as organizations are concerned. Alain
Touraine's contributions got for instance a rather rough treatment,
being associated to 'de franse slag'. Cor does not feel attracted by
speculative approaches. To some extent, this is in line with his
socialization process in the Dutch and Protestant cultures. God
cannot be reduced to common ideas, ordinary ideas. Theory is one and
indivisible, every human being has equal access to it and it should
matter for everyone. Therefore beware not to mess around with it.
Well, Cor, for quite a few years, some French authors (catholics,
should I add) were perceived as tricky scientists. I now wonder
whether you would not have to revise your judgment. At least French
scholars nowadays have from time to time the feeling that agnostic
Northern and AngloSaxon colleagues commit more sins than themselves
do and you would have trouble accepting them. You are a cosmopolitan
fundamentalist.
Cor has been and remains a creative researcher, starting in the
late fifties and early sixtiess with studies on merry events such as
evacuation and disaster experiences, general practitioners and their
patients, or strikes and mutinies. In the beginning of the third
millenium, you deal with armies at war, military occupations and
atrocities. One may be puzzled by such a consistent pattern. Is Cor
carrying the misery of the world on his shoulder? No. What is
impressive is the variety of the issues ha has covered with his
research publications. One should add industrial democracy,
socialization processes, student unionism, etc., etc. While Cor has
made a moderate use of number crunching as well as case studies, he
has emphasized the use of one specific source of data: archives and
libraries.
Last but not least: While Cor Lammers has always showed some
reluctance to enter grand theory debates, he often has reminded us
that theory of organizations as such is one of the most valid
reasons to fight for a discipline which should beware of two dangers:
being too much business-oriented, becoming the alibi for some causes
and advocates. Cor has never been close to a consulting role, and he
has been rather cautious about the idea that knowledge about
organizations should be oriented toward management and utility based
perspectives. He has chosen to remain in a department of sociology
and has remained far away of the business schools connection.
Cor, you may feel rather skeptical about the discipline or the
field as they are today. Let me express two requests. Be patient,
there may come a time again when the trend shall change and your
ideals shall get more recognition. And do all you can to remain a
citizen of our scientific community as long as possible: We need
and respect you as a statesman.
EGOS is glad to honor a great sociologist and a tough minded
scholar!
Jean-Claude Thoenig
|
