Search results

Whilst the story of technological change and de-unionisation in the newspaper industry in the UK is generally well known, the parallel changes in the magazine industry have not been subject to such academic interest. The magazine industry underwent a profound transformation from the 1980s, driven both by organisational and technological change. Subject to different drivers of technological change to that of the newspaper industry, union responses were more fragmented and emergent. These responses were markedly different from those of unions in the more regulated newspaper industry, as magazine publishing companies were quite heterogeneous, often smaller, implying closer and more pragmatic relationships between firms and labour. The paper first outlines the development of the British print unions serving both the newspaper and magazines sectors. In particular the paper uses a review of hereto unexamined documents relating to the print firms, such as Odhams (Watford) Ltd, within the IPC magazine publishing conglomerate, and examines how technological change in the magazine sector was driven not by changes in printing technology, but by ultimately by developments in the micro-computing industry and the desire to enforce the "right of managers to manage." In contrast to this many of the smaller entrants into the industry developed a different relationship with labour unions. The advent of desk-top publishing (DTP) systems undermined both basis of demarcation in the labour force, and of the organisation of production. The main unions involved, the NUJ, NGA and SOGAT, found that the boundaries between their responsibilities were eroded. The unions involved underwent a period of restructuring, where several of the unions merged (or failed to merge) and consolidation in response to technological change, which had many implications to how the unions positioned themselves and approached issues such as collective agreements and training. Within smaller firms however the unions had put working arrangements in place to overcome the technologically-driven erosion of demarcation. In conclusion the differences between changes in the newspaper print business, print relationships at IPC and within the sector more generally are contrasted. What emerges is a different story of change in the print sector to that which is generally given for the 1980s period, adding to a more subtle and contextualised story of how labour unions have adapted to technological and organisation change. This may serve to reposition debates on print union change from more politically-driven narratives of government-union conflict based in industrial relations approaches, towards a more productive domain of debate located in employment relations models as outlined by Belnave and Mortimer (2005.) This approach negates the excessive managerialist approach of HRM focused on worker flexibility, but acknowledges the positive outcomes of widening industry participation beyond unionised workers. With digitisation currently fuelling debate on the changing the nature of employment relations in the industry this story outlines how many of these issues were addressed by the actors involved in the 1980s and 1990s, and reveals that for print relations, the past could be the future.

Britain's newspaper and magazine publishing business did not fare particularly well during the 1950s. With leading newspaper proprietors placing their desire for political influence above that of financial performance, and with working practices in Fleet Street becoming virtually ungovernable, it was little surprise to find many leading periodical publishers on the verge of bankruptcy by the decade's end. A notable exception to this general picture of financial mismanagement was provided by the chain of enterprises controlled by Roy Thomson. Having first established a base in Scotland in 1953 through the acquisition of the Scotsman newspaper publishing group, the Canadian entrepreneur brought a new commercial attitude and business strategy to bear on Britain's periodical publishing industry. Using profits generated by a string of successful media activities, in 1959 Thomson bought a place in Fleet Street through the acquisition of Lord Kemsley's chain of newspapers, which included the prestigious Sunday Times. Early in 1961 Thomson came to an agreement with Christopher Chancellor, the recently appointed Chief Executive of Odhams Press, to merge their two publishing groups and thereby create a major new force in the British newspaper and magazine publishing industry. The deal was never consummated however. Within days of publicly announcing the merger, Odhams found its shareholders being seduced by an improved offer from Cecil King, Chairman of Daily Mirror Newspapers, Ltd., which they duly accepted. The Mirror's acquisition of Odhams was deeply controversial, mainly because it brought under common ownership the two left-leaning British popular newspapers, the Mirror and the Herald. Our paper utilises archive sources from the Cabinet Office to explore the political dialogue that enabled the controversial takeover to proceed unopposed by the regulatory authority of the Monopolies Commission. In business terms, it analyses the implication of the successful prosecution of the King-led deal for magazine publishing in Britain: namely, the creation of a virtual monopoly through the formation of the Mirror-controlled IPC Magazines.

Britain's newspaper and magazine publishing business did not fare particularly well during the 1950s. With leading newspaper proprietors placing their desire for political influence above that of financial performance, and with working practices in Fleet Street becoming virtually ungovernable, it was little surprise to find many leading periodical publishers on the verge of bankruptcy by the decade's end. A notable exception to this general picture of financial mismanagement was provided by the chain of enterprises controlled by Roy Thomson. Having first established a base in Scotland in 1953 through the acquisition of the Scotsman newspaper publishing group, the Canadian entrepreneur brought a new commercial attitude and business strategy to bear on Britain's periodical publishing industry. Using profits generated by a string of successful media activities, in 1959 Thomson bought a place in Fleet Street through the acquisition of Lord Kemsley's chain of newspapers, which included the prestigious Sunday Times. Early in 1961 Thomson came to an agreement with Christopher Chancellor, the recently appointed Chief Executive of Odhams Press, to merge their two publishing groups and thereby create a major new force in the British newspaper and magazine publishing industry. The deal was never consummated however. Within days of publicly announcing the merger, Odhams found its shareholders being seduced by an improved offer from Cecil King, Chairman of Daily Mirror Newspapers, Ltd., which they duly accepted. The Mirror's acquisition of Odhams was deeply controversial, mainly because it brought under common ownership the two left-leaning British popular newspapers, the Mirror and the Herald. Our paper utilises archive sources from the Cabinet Office to explore the political dialogue that enabled the controversial takeover to proceed unopposed by the regulatory authority of the Monopolies Commission. In business terms, it analyses the implication of the successful prosecution of the King-led deal for magazine publishing in Britain: namely, the creation of a virtual monopoly through the formation of the Mirror-controlled IPC Magazines.

Britain's newspaper and magazine publishing business did not fare particularly well during the 1950s. With leading newspaper proprietors placing their desire for political influence above that of financial performance, and with working practices in Fleet Street becoming virtually ungovernable, it was little surprise to find many leading periodical publishers on the verge of bankruptcy by the decade's end. A singular exception to this general picture of financial mismanagement was provided by the chain of enterprises controlled by Roy Thomson. Having first established a base in Scotland in 1953 through the acquisition of the Scotsman newspaper publishing group, the Canadian entrepreneur brought a new commercial attitude and business strategy to bear on Britain's publishing industry. Using profits generated by a string of successful media activities, in 1959 Thomson bought a place in Fleet Street through the acquisition of Lord Kemsey's chain of newspapers, which included the prestigious Sunday Times. Early in 1961 Thomson came to an agreement with Christopher Chancellor, the recently appointed Chief Executive of Odhams Press, to merge their two publishing groups and thereby create a major new force in the British newspaper and magazine publishing industry. The deal was never consummated however. Within days of publicly announcing the merger, Odhams found its shareholders being seduced by an improved offer from Cecil King, Chairman of Daily Mirror Newspapers, Ltd., which they duly accepted. The Mirror's acquisition of Odhams was deeply controversial, mainly because it brought under common ownership the two left-leaning British popular newspapers, the Mirror and the Herald. The current paper utilises archive sources from the Cabinet Office to explore the political dialogue that enabled the controversial takeover to proceed unopposed by the regulatory authority of the Monopolies Commission. In business terms, it analyses the implication of the successful prosecution of the deal for magazine publishing in Britain: the creation of a virtual monopoly through the formation of the Mirror-controlled IPC Magazines, and Thomson's hostile response to this new enterprise spearheaded through his ownership of the Sunday Times.

For sustainable business strategies to be effective, they need to be authentic, and successfully implemented with active participation from management and staff throughout the organisation. This process has been under researched in the environmental and strategic management literature. The tourism industry provides an ideal context to examine this process when it is based on a 'green' image, as it relies on the 'authentic' imagery of and engagement with the natural environment to differentiate destinations and to create competitive advantage. As the outcomes of these strategies are dependent on the active participation and engagement of front-line staff, and are observable by consumers, poorly implemented strategies will not be authentic and can open organisations to allegations of 'greenwash.' This paper investigates the translation of the 100% Pure New Zealand branding campaign into authentic sustainability strategies, and the implementation process to embed these strategies. The study was undertaken using the qualitative research based on of multiple case studies, where information was gathered using semi structured interviews with the manager and front-line employees of four i-SITEs, as well an observation of the i-SITE buildings, where tourists interact with the 100% Pure brand. The results were examined using thematic analysis, where a number of themes emerged, including: sustainability, the definition, policies, practices and procedures, as well as an identification of barriers to implementation; the perceptions and relevance of third party accreditation, in particular the Qualmark Enviro Awards; an exploration of authenticity in a tourism industry context; the communication of sustainability top-down from council and ground-up, including with tourists; and an exploration to identify an understanding of imagery and concepts of 100% Pure campaign. Four concepts were identified for further discussion. First, the constraints and barriers to sustainability strategies: with reference to the council, the building, and a discourse between the participant's home sustainability actions and work implementation. Second, how Tourism New Zealand translates the 100% Pure campaign into a strategic vision. Third, an exploration of the understanding and meaning of authenticity. Fourth, a discussion on implementing and embedding authentic sustainability strategies. The study makes contributions to theory, policy and practice. For the implementation of authentic strategies the study suggests that a whole organisation approach, that combines top-down and bottom-up approaches, is necessary to implement and embed successful sustainability strategies. These theoretical insights are elaborated from two perspectives: top-down and from bottom-up, resulting in two levels of policy implications. The top-down perspective focuses on how Tourism New Zealand and local councils can better communicate the strategic vision created using the 100% Pure brand, as well as suggestions for more effective dissemination of information and knowledge about sustainability, and related policy. The bottom-up perspective focuses on employee empowerment, to engage in the creation, implementation and review of sustainability strategy to enable authentic implementation and embeddedness. Specific recommendations are offered for management practice that there must be an involvement and commitment of time and resources, not just financial resources, by the management and staff at the i-SITEs, the local councils, as well as central government through Tourism New Zealand to more effectively embed authentic strategies throughout the organisations involved.

For most of the twentieth century, the publishing of magazines was technologically and organisationally embedded within the printing industry. By charting the origins and evolution of Britain's principal magazine publisher, IPC, this paper demonstrates how these organisational inflexibilities served to constrain new product development and promoted a competitive regime based upon mass production coupled with a low pricing strategy founded on cheap weekly magazines. During the 1980s, however, radical changes in working practices within the printing industry, stemming from the political reforms to trade union power, paved the way for a revolution in publishing technology. The introduction of desktop publishing (DTP) packages after 1985 thus heralded a new competitive phase in the magazine industry, promoting a much greater emphasis on innovation as a competitive weapon and supporting enhanced forms of product differentiation and organisational flexibility.