In the 1980s, the hegemony of the large US advertising networks has been challenged by a new breed of London-based agencies who pioneered what is known in the trade as ‘second wave’. On the one hand, second wave implied the emancipation of Soho from an ‘outpost of Madison Avenue’ to the ‘advertising village’ on the basis of momentous product and process innovations. On the other hand, a few London agencies rose to global top positions on the crest of the second wave by transforming themselves from international advertising networks into global communication groups. This paper starts from the assumption that both, the localised cluster of advertising agencies in the advertising village (the ‘Village’) and the global communications group (the ‘Group’), share basic principles of social organisation. It aims at demonstrating that the organisational logic of both the Village and the Group can be conceptualised in terms of a heterarchy. By drawing on case-study evidence from Soho on the one hand and from the world leading communications business, WPP, on the other, the five basic features of heterarchies—diversity, rivalry, tags, projects, and reflexivity—will provide the conceptual tools for the investigation into the social organisation of the Village and the Group.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AbercrombieN, 1991, “The privilege of the producer”, in Enterprise Culture Eds KeatRAbercrombieN (Routledge, London) pp 57–72.
AlvessonM, 1994, “Talking in organizations: Managing identity and impressions in an advertising agency”Organization Studies15535–563.
4.
ArthurW B, 1996Increasing Returns and Path Dependence in the Economy (University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, MI).
5.
ArthurW B, 1999, “The end of economic certainty”, in The Biology of Business: Decoding the Natural Laws of Enterprise Ed. ClippingerJ H (Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA) pp 31–47.
6.
ArthurW BDurlaufS NLaneD A (Eds), 1997The Economy as an Evolving Complex System II(Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA).
7.
BarrettF J, 1998, “Creativity and improvisation in jazz and organization: Implications for organizational learning”Organization Science9605–622.
8.
BordieuP, 1977Outline of a Theory of Practice (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge).
9.
ClarkA, 1997Being There: Putting Brain, Body, and the World Together Again (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).
10.
ClarkA, 1999, “Leadership and influence: The manager as coach, nanny, and artificial DNA”, in The Biology of Business: Decoding the Natural Laws of Enterprise Ed. ClippingerJ H (Jossey-Boss, San Francisco, CA) pp 47–66.
11.
ClippingerJ H, 1999, “Order from the bottom up: Complex adaptive systems and their management”, in The Biology of Business: Decoding the Natural Laws of Enterprise Ed. ClippingerJ H (Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA) pp 1–31.
12.
CyertRMarchJ G, 1963A Behavioural Theory of the Firm (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ).
13.
DavidsonM, 1992The Consumerist Manifesto: Advertising in Postmodern Times (Routledge, London).
14.
DeFillippiR JArthurM B, 1998, “Paradox in project-based enterprise: The case of film making”California Management Review40(2) 125–138.
15.
FindlayS CLumsdenC J, 1988, “The creative mind: Toward an evolutionary theory of discovery and innovation”Journal of Social and Biological Structures115–55.
16.
GalisonP, 1998Image and Logic (University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL).
17.
GrabherG, 1995Lob der Verschwendung: Redundanz in der Regionalentwicklung [In praise of waste: redundancy in regional development] (Edition Sigma, Berlin).
18.
GrabherGStarkD, 1997a, “Organizing diversity: Evolutionary theory, network analysis and post-socialism”, in Restructuring Networks in Post-socialism: Legacies, Linkages, and Localities Eds GrabherGStarkD (Oxford University Press, Oxford) pp 1–32.
19.
GrabherGStarkD (Eds), 1997bRestructuring Networks: Legacies, Linkages, and Localities in Post-socialism (Oxford University Press, Oxford).
20.
GreinADucoffeR, 1998, “Strategic responses to market globalisation among advertising agencies”International Journal of Advertising17301–319.
21.
HatchM J, 1999, “Exploring the empty spaces of organizing: How improvisational jazz helps redescribe organizational structure”Organization Studies20(1) 75–100.
22.
HedlundG, 1986, “The hypermodern MNC—a heterarchy?”Human Resource Management25(1) 9–35.
23.
HedlundGRolanderD, 1990, “Action in heterarchies—new approaches to managing the MNC”, in Managing the Global Firm Eds BartlettC ADozYHedlundG (Routledge, London) pp 15–46.
24.
HollandJ H, 1992Adaptation in Natural and Artificial Systems (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).
JacksonPTaylorJ, 1996, “Geography and the cultural politics of advertising”Progress in Human Geography20356–371.
27.
JonesC, 1996, “Careers in project networks: The case of the film industry”, in The Boundaryless Career Eds ArthurM BRousseauD M (Oxford University Press, New York) pp 58–75.
28.
LashSUrryJ, 1994Economies of Signs and Spaces (Sage, London).
29.
LawA, 1998Open Minds: 21st Century Business Lessons and Innovations from St. Luke's (Orion Business Books, London).
30.
LeeM J, 1993Consumer Culture Reborn: The Cultural Politics of Consumption (Routledge, London).
31.
LeslieD A, 1995, “Global scan: The globalization of advertising agencies, concepts and campaigns”Economic Geography71402–426.
32.
LeslieD A, 1997, “Flexibly specialized agencies? Reflexivity, identity, and the advertising industry”Environment and Planning A291017–1038.
33.
LesterR KPioreM JMalekK M, 1998, “Interpretive management: What general managers can learn from design”Harvard Business Review226–35.
34.
Llewelyn-Davis, UCL Bartlett School for Planning, Comedia, 1996Four World Cities: A Comparative Study of London, Paris, New York and Tokyo (Llewelyn-Davis, London).
35.
LuhmannN, 1986, “The autopiesis of social systems”, in Sociocybernetic Paradoxes, Observation, Control and Evolution of Self-steering Systems Eds GeyerFZouwenJ V D (Sage, London) pp 172–192.
36.
LuryC, 1990, “Flexible specialization in the advertising industry”, working paper, Department of Sociology, Lancaster University, Lancaster.
37.
McCullochW S, 1965, “A heterarchy of values determined by the topology of nervous nets”, in Embodiments of Mind Ed. McCullochW S (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA) pp 40–45.
38.
ManvilleB, 1999, “Complex adaptive knowledge management: A Case from McKinsey & Company” in The Biology of Business: Decoding the Natural Laws of Enterprise Ed. ClippingerJ H (Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA) pp 89–113.
39.
MarchJ, 1991, “Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning”Organization Science2(1) 71–87.
40.
MattelartA, 1991Advertising International: The Privatisation of Public Space (Routledge, London).
41.
MeyersonDWeickK EKramerR M, 1996, “Swift trust and temporary groups”, in Trust in Organizations: Frontiers of Theory and Research Eds KramerR MTylerT R (Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA) pp 166–195.
42.
MolotchH, 1996, “LA as design product: How art works in a regional economy”, in The City: Los Angeles and Urban Theory at the End of the Twentieth Century Eds. ScottA JSojaE (University of California Press, Berkeley, CA) pp 225–275.
43.
NachumLKeebleD, 1999, “Neo-Marshallian nodes, global networks and firm competitiveness: the media cluster of Central London”, WP138, ESCR Centre for Business Research, University of Cambridge, Cambridge.
PerryM, 1990, “The internationalisation of advertising”Geoforum21(1) 35–50.
46.
SassenS, 1995, “On concentration and centrality in the global city”, in World Cities in A World System Eds KnoxP LTaylorP J (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge) pp 63–75.
47.
ScottA J, 1997, “The cultural economy of cities”International Journal of Urban and Regional Research21323–339.
48.
ScottA J, 1999, “From Silicon Valley to Hollywood: Growth and development of the multimedia industry in California”, in Regional Innovation Systems: The Role of Governances in a Globalized World Eds BraczykH JCookePHeidenreichM (UCL Press, London) pp 136–163.
49.
ShapiroDAbercrombieNLashSLuryC, 1992, “Flexible specialisation in the culture industries”, in Regional Development and Contemporary Industrial Response Eds ErnsteHMeierV (Belhaven Press, London) pp 179–194.
50.
StarkD, 1999, “Heterarchy: Distributed authority and organizing of diversity”, in The Biology of Business: Decoding the Natural Laws of Enterprise Ed. ClippingerJ H (Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA) pp 153–181.
51.
StorperM, 1997The Regional World: Territorial Development in a Global Economy (Guilford Press, New York).
52.
SummersJ, 1989Soho (Bloomsbury, London).
53.
TamesR, 1994Soho Past (Historical Publications, London).
54.
TaschjianE, 1981, “The role of ambivalence in heterarchic social systems”, in Human Systems, Sociocybernetics, Management and Organizations Ed. LaskerG E (Pergamon Press, New York) pp 1010–1023.
55.
WeickK, 1998, “Improvisation as a mindset for organizational analysis”Organization Science 9543–555.
56.
WengerE, 1998Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge).
57.
WestD C, 1988, “Multinational competition in the British advertising agency business, 1983–1987”Business History Review62467–501.
58.
WestD C, 1996, “The determinants and consequences of multinational advertising agencies”International Journal of Advertising15128–139.
