Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:


Or use your Academic/Social account:


You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.


Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message


Verify Password:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Konzelmann, Suzanne J.; Fovargue-Davies, M. (2013)
Publisher: Cambridge Centre for Business Research
Languages: English
Types: Book
Subjects: man
This paper explores the current debate about industrial strategy and the UK’s \ud hesitant acceptance of a possible role for the state in addressing the challenges \ud confronting British industry in the wake of the 2007/8 financial crisis. In this \ud context – and following the 2012 London Summer Games – political leaders \ud have been pointing to the strategy that succeeded in reversing the British \ud Olymic team’s fortunes following its nadir at the 1996 Atlanta Summer Games; \ud and they are suggesting that there may be lessons for industry. However, the \ud political rhetoric has yet to be translated into action. Analysis of the elite sport \ud strategy, in the light of the evolving literature on industrial strategy and policy \ud suggests that although there are details that are specific to sport, there are also \ud aspects of the general strategic approach that can be used to inform the design \ud and implementation of a strategy aimed at developing and improving the \ud international competitive performance of UK industrial sectors and \ud manufacturers. The significance of the UK elite sport strategy is that it was \ud evolved and successfully implemented in the British social, political and \ud economic context, building on and improving existing institutional capabilities.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • 11 Lall 2004; Devarajan and Uy 2009; Budzinski and Schmidt 2006; Rodrik 2008.
    • 17 Naude 2010; Owen 2012; Peres and Primi 2009; Pryce 2012; Sharp 2001; Warwick 2013.
    • 19 BIS 2010; Wren 1996b; Greenway and Milner 1994; Vickers and Yarrrow 1988.
    • Cimoli, M., G. Dosi, R. Nelson and J. Stiglitz (2006) 'Institutions and Policies Shaping Industrial Development: An Introductory Note.' LEM (Laboratory of Economics and Management) Working Paper, January). http://www.lem.sssup.it/WPLem/files/2006-02.pdf  Cowling, K. And P. Tomlinson (2011) 'Post the 'Washington Consensus': Economic Governance and Industrial Strategies for the 21st Century.' Cambridge Journal of Economics. 35(5): 831-852.
    • Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) (1994) Competitiveness: Helping Business to Win, Cm 2563. HMSO, London.
    • ----------- (1995) Competitiveness: Forging Ahead, Cm 2867. HMSO, London.
    • ----------- (1996) Competitiveness: Creating the Enterprise Centre of Europe, Cm 3300. HMSO, London.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article