Emergence of Modern Retailing

8/17/2019 Emergence of Modern Retailing

1/16

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found athttp://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=fbsh20

Download by: [University of Technology Sydney] Date: 14 September 2015, At: 22:01

Business History

ISSN: 0007-6791 (Print) 1743-7938 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/fbsh20

Introduction: The Emergence of Modern Retailing,1750–1950

Nicholas Alexander & Gary Akehurst

To cite this article: Nicholas Alexander & Gary Akehurst (1998) Introduction: The Emergence of

Modern Retailing, 1750–1950, Business History, 40:4, 1-15, DOI: 10.1080/00076799800000335

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00076799800000335

Published online: 28 Jul 2006.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 509

View related articles

Citing articles: 9 View citing articles

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/citedby/10.1080/00076799800000335#tabModulehttp://www.tandfonline.com/doi/citedby/10.1080/00076799800000335#tabModulehttp://www.tandfonline.com/doi/mlt/10.1080/00076799800000335http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/mlt/10.1080/00076799800000335http://www.tandfonline.com/action/authorSubmission?journalCode=fbsh20&page=instructionshttp://www.tandfonline.com/action/authorSubmission?journalCode=fbsh20&page=instructionshttp://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00076799800000335http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1080/00076799800000335http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/fbsh20http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=fbsh20


2/16

Introduction: The Emergence of Modern

Retailing 1750-1950

N I C H O L A S A L E X A N D E R a n d G A R Y A K E H U R S T

ournemouth University

Portsmouth University

This collection of essays is devoted to the history of retailing. There are

three primary motivations which lie behind this publication. First, it is

recognised that retailing has received limited attention within the discipline

of history. Secondly, where retailing has become an area considered worthy

of academic study, notably within management studies, the historical

dimension has been under-valued and under-explored. Thirdly, studies in

retail history must draw on both historical and management traditions if

valuable research is to be undertaken.

This publication is, therefore, intended both as an opportunity to bring

together academics working on retail business history from backgrounds in

history, historical-geography and management, and to indicate that there is

a rich vein of research to be explored in this subject area. The essays

included in this publication are examples of the w ork that has been done and

examples of the issues which deserve consideration in the context of this

important area of business, economic and social activity.

That history, as a discipline, has ignored retailing would be something o f

an exaggeration, but it would certainly be correct to acknowledge that retail

history has been something of a poor relation within the study of business

history, which itself has had to assert its right to be seated at history s high

table. While business history journals, such as the Business History Review

and Business History, have published in the area of retail h istory, they also

illustrate the relative paucity of activity in the area of retailing. While

manufacturing industry and other service sectors have attracted interest,

retail history articles are few and far between in these journals. Indeed,

when articles on distribution and trade-related issues are excluded, the

number of articles on retailing per

s

are very few. While it may not be

surprising to find the service sector generally underrepresented (it has also

received insufficient attention within management studies), it is a little more

surprising to see research interest in retailing lagging behind areas such as

financial services. Indeed, it is particularly instructive to place the

development, or lack of development, of retail business history against the

D o w n l o a d e d b y [ U

n i v e r s i t y o f T e c h n o l o g y

S y d n e y ] a t 2 2 : 0 1 1 4 S e p

t e m b e r 2 0 1 5


3/16

T H E E M E R G E N C E

O F

M O D E R N R E T A I L I N G

development of financial services history; where, as Pearson has pointed

out, the emergence of the Financial History eview in recent years is

illustrative of the increased interest in that area of the service economy

which contrasts clearly with the experience of distribution and retailing.

Likewise, Godley and Ross s recent special issue of Business H i ~ t o r y , ~nd

Jones s recent work on multinational banking: points toward a growing

literature and academic interest in this area. The service sector is clearly not

out of bounds, but retailing has clearly shown itself to be a slow developer.

Consideration of articles in Business History since 958 shows that, while

important work has appeared, it has not been part of what might be

considered a sustained effort to explore the retail business history

dimension. Articles by Blackman, Scott, Hopkins, Mui and Mui, Porter,

Redlich, Rubin, and Shaw illustrate the work which has addressed retail

issues directly or comparatively,4 and other articles, such as those by Dixon,

Green, Harvey and Press, Jones, Sutton, and W ea ti~ eri ll,~hed light on retail

history through the primary consideration of other issues. While the subject

matter of these articles is informative, they have neither created a focused

debate, nor scrutinised particular issues beyond, arguably, the emergence of

modern retail systems during the nineteenth century. Indeed, the lack of

historical consideration has become self-perpetuating. As Christine Shaw

has noted with reference to the Dictionary of Business Biography: a

consequence of business history s neglect of retailing has been such that, at

the time of the dictionary s compilation, it was both difficult to identify

retailers who should be included in the dictionary and to compile

biographies with suitable depth.

The comparative failure of business history to embrace retailing as a

subject worthy of consideration is somewhat mirrored by retail

management s failure to embrace historical method and recognise the worth

of historical issues when considering management subjects. This failure,

which has been explored and lamented within retail studies journals in

recent years on both sides of the Atlantic, remains a serious impediment to

the development of an understanding of retail change. Retail management

studies has emerged as a vital area of academic development in the last two

decades, but it has tended to ignore the historical dimension. In the U K, the

subject area has come into being through the synthesis of geographical and

marketing academic research and has been formalised into an area of

teaching through the needs o f the comm ercial sector. Since the mid-1 980s,

universities in the U have developed courses in retail management which

have drawn heavily on the research carried out by geographers and

marketers in the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s and have been strongly influenced

by the cognitive structures borrowed from marketing and retail academics

in the US.8



S y d n e y ] a t 2 2 : 0 1 1 4 S e p

t e m b e r 2 0 1 5


4/16

I N T R O D U C T I O N

The influence of geography and marketing on retail management studies

has made the subject area both intellectually and commercially accessible,

but it has largely done so to the exclusion of the historical perspective. This

lack of recognition for the historical dimension within retail management

studies is somewhat surprising given the early interest in this area by

economists such as Jefferys? whose contribution has certainly influenced

those perceptions of UK retail change which are accepted today, and whose

interpretative framework has become embedded in the research

assumptions of geographers and marketers working in the area of retail

management, but which has had limited direct impact on contemporary

research agendas.I0 As Shaw t

al

note in this publication, the common

research interests of 'timing, pattern and process of growth' have linked

economic historians and historical geographers and this has led to a cross-

fertilisation of ideas between the economists and the geographers. However,

within the mainstream of retail management research, such influences have

been som ewhat over-shadow ed by the contributions of other disciplines and

the needs of the commercial perspective which has been taken to exclude

the 'wasteful luxury' of historical understanding.

Retail business history is an underexplored area, but it is not an unexplored

one, and the influences upon this area of research deserve consideration if

problems and opportunities are be fully understood and if a lack of

awareness o f existing research and subsequent replication of effort is to be

avoided.

There are a number of different influences which come together within

the study of retail business history. These influences emanate from the

disciplines of economics, geography, history and management. Each

discipline has made a contribution, and is likely to provide continued

contributions; each discipline has absorbed influence from the other in

varying degrees but an identifiable body of well-informed retail business

literature with n historical understanding has not been produced through a

synthesis of these elements, nor is it likely to appear unless there is a greater

focusing o f research effort.

To a considerable extent, the most likely context in which to find a

synthesis of ideas should be retail management studies, which, as noted

above, has not only been influenced by marketing and hence management

theory and methods but has also been influenced by geographical and

economic theory and research. The subject area has assimilated

contributions from older, more established disciplines. Likewise, it has

generated, particularly in the US environment, theories which attempt to



S y d n e y ] a t 2 2 : 0 1 1 4 S e p

t e m b e r 2 0 1 5


5/16


O

M O D E R N R E T A I L I N G

explain structural development of retail institutions. It has begun to produce

frameworks within which debate may occur and to which reference may be

made as studies challenge or support theoretical constructs.

This promising environment, however, has not led to the exploitation of

historical method nor to a considerable extent has it seen the acceptance of

history as a means by which greater understanding of commercial problems

and opportunities may be achieved. Alexander has suggested, that, despitc

the efforts of retail researchers to establish the validity of historical method,

there are essentially five inhibitors psychology, focus, methodology,

capacity and publication which restrict the use of history in the

development of the subject area.12 That is, psychological barriers exist

through the assumptions of the business community and the intellectual

perspectives many academics engaged in retail studies will bring to the

subject, while the focus of much of the historical material already produced

appears remote from the concerns of contemporary management studies,

methodologies are unfamiliar, the capacity for study of subjects which

demand commitment and resources are lacking and the opportunities for

publication within retail management journals are limited.

Likewise, the theories which have emerged within retail management

studies have developed without the historical analysis which would allow

for their validation or contradiction. As Hollander has noted from a

marketing perspective in the context of the 'accordion' theory of retail

change, it is not possible to acknowledge the universality of the wide

assortment to narrow assortment alternation which appears to occur within

the retail environment or to prove that such an alternation exists, because

'there are no valid historical statistics on merchandise assortments7. These

thoughts echo his earlier comments on the 'wheel of retailing', where he

observed that historical data on such as 'retail expense rates is very scarce'

and hence undermine the theoretical framework of the wheel theory.'

Gareth Shaw has more recently echoed these sentiments from an historical

geography perspective, when he noted that 'few empirical studies of a

historical nature have been undertaken to help establish either the

usefulness or validity of such historical perspective^'.^^ That Shaw is still

able to make the same assertions as Hollander a quarter of a century later

illustrates that very few attempts have been m ade to test those models which

have come to influence thinking within retail managem ent. Savitt's study of

Comet Radiovision is one of the few examples of an attempt to test the

'wheel of retailing' theory through the use of historical methods and data,'

and serves to illustrate that, apart from a few prominent individuals,

historical method has not been accepted by the retail management

community as a useful or even legitimate tool in the development of retail

management studies. Indeed, the lack of understanding as to the validity of



S y d n e y ] a t 2 2 : 0 1 1 4 S e p

t e m b e r 2 0 1 5


6/16

I N T R O D U C T I O N 5

retail change models has not so much led to the testing of such models as to

their abandonment in favour of research which focuses on micro rather than

macro developments. The universality of such models has been called into

question and the subject has found refuge in positivism on a micro-scale.

The articles contained within this issue highlight both those areas which

have attracted the focus of academic concern to date and som e of the areas

which deserve greater attention. The articles are written by academics from

those disciplines which have already contributed to the development of

retail business history: from history, Christina Fowler, Matthew Hilton,

Deborah Hodson and Jonathan Morris; from geography, Martin Purvis;

from management, Joshua Bamfield; and from all three areas, contributing

to one article, Gareth Shaw, Andrew Alexander, John Benson and John

Jones.

This collection of essays reflects the interest shown by researchers in the

development of retailing during the late nineteenth century and early

twentieth century. It also challenges the accepted view that the genesis of

modem retail systems occurred in the second half of the nineteenth century.

Therefore, the theme which brings together the essays in this publication is

the emergence of modem retail systems during the period 1750-1950.

Hilton, Hodson, Purvis and Shaw et al focus on the period

1850-1950

which is associated with a dynamic period of change in retail systems, a

period which witnessed considerable structural and operational changes

within retailing. However, this publication also shows that the retail

innovations associated with this period may be seen to have their origins in

an earlier period and that, in west European markets, the innovations which

are commonly associated with the period 1875-1914 occurred at a later

date, in som e contexts. As Bamfield s and Fowler s articles illustrate,

modem retail systems may be seen to have their origins in the late

eighteenth century and early nineteenth century. Likewise, Morris s essay

illustrates that the adoption of modem retail practices did not occur in the

Italian context until relatively late, the 1930s, and then in the face of

considerable opposition.

Interest in nineteenth-century retailing has, in great part, focused on the

development of multiple branch operations and the development and role of

the co-operative societies. Both these themes are considered in this

publication. However, before the contributions presented here may be

considered in greater depth, it is necessary to establish the context in which

recent and current research on these issues should be placed.

The importance of multiple branch operations to the development of



S y d n e y ] a t 2 2 : 0 1 1 4 S e p

t e m b e r 2 0 1 5


7/16


O F

M O D E R N

R E T I L I N G

modem retail forms is well established within the literature. Jefferys'

seminal work in this area, which concentrated on the developm ent of

multiple retailing in the period 1850-1939, has set an agenda which

historians of retail business development within the

UK

have adopted and

developed. In Phillips' opinion, such 'monumental empirical studies' have

not only established a focus for other work but have also established

'assumptions and incontestable factY .'* Indeed , Jefferys' work has

provided such an important reference point for research that the very dates

used by him have established a form of periodisation within this research

area. For retail historians working in the shadow of Jefferys, the nineteenth

century has become in great part a century o f two halves. For Jefferys, 'the

wholesale and retail trades in Britain in the middle of the nineteenth century

were examples of those trades that still bore the marks of the old system

rather than of the new', where the old system was defined by the first phase

of the industrial revolution, where Britain was not in the full sense of the

term an industrial state and where som e trades were still 'more familiar with

handicraft methods and outworking than with power-driven machines and

f a c t ~ r i e s ' . ' ~or Jefferys, it was the 100 years after 1850, but in particular

the period 1875 to 1914, which saw a transformation in the distributive

trades to the same degree that the manufacturing sectors of the econom y had

seen change in the previous 100 years. Three key aspects of change were

described and established as the basis for future growth. He identified the

importance of the methods of operation which came to characterise the

retail function after 1900: flamboyant window displays, advertising, marked

and fixed prices clearly displayed. He identified the retailers' changing role

within the distribution channel and the factors which were effecting that

change: the branding of manufacturers' products, producer advertising,

resale price maintenance. He identified the changing institutional form

retailing was adopting: large-scale retailing of a departmental, co-operative

or multiple branch nature. Thus, there were both factors which forced

change on the retail sector and changes within retailing which transformed

the nature of distribution outlets. It was these external and internal factors

which brought about institutional change and the development of such as

the multiple store operation and the operating and distribution procedures

associated with it.

Jefferys' perceptions of the development of multiple store retailing and

the periodisation of retail development was firther supported by David

Alexander in h is consideration of retailing in England during the industrial

re v~ lu tion .~ ' or Alexander, multiple retailing required the separation of

production and retailing, an advanced system of transportation and the

existence of staff who could oversee the branch operation. In his opinion,

none of these factors existed to a sufficient degree in 1850 to support



S y d n e y ] a t 2 2 : 0 1 1 4 S e p

t e m b e r 2 0 1 5


8/16


multiple operations on any scale. Alexander s evidence for multiple

operations suggested that they existed either in the form of a satellite shop

staffed by a trustworthy individual or as a market stall.

For the retail historian, and particularly for academics looking at the

history of retailing from a retail management perspective, 1850 has been

perceived as a watershed.

It

has been suggested that, from 1850, modern

forms of retailing began to take shape. Before that date, retailing existed in

a less recognisable and essentially historical form which bore little

relationship to the modem environment. For retail management, this has

had the implication that earlier forms were taken to be irrelevant and less

worthy o f study. In this context, for example, Savitt s consideration of New

England retailing stands out as somewhat unusual,2 particularly in the retail

management context, for its consideration of pre-modern retail periods.

However, in this, Savitt was following in the footsteps of Nystr0m,2~who

suggested the history of American retailing fell into five periods: the

prehistoric Indian trade, the trading post period, the general merchandise

era, the period o f rise and developm ent of single-line independent speciality

stores, the modern period of large-scale retailing. Indeed, US econom ic and

managem ent academ ics willingness to consider pre-industrial retailing is

noteworthy in comparison to

UK

retail management academics general

reluctance to look at their pre-history of retailing, which for them is

anything before 1850. US academics willingness to look beyond that date

may

n

part be the product of a clearly definable date at which, to use

Nystrom s periodisation,z3American retail pre-history ends: that is, with

arrival of European traders. Thus, US management academics have the

comfort of knowing they do not have to look beyond the Colonial period,

while European academics are faced with a pre-modern and Medieval

period of retailing which they need to divide from the supposed relevance

of retail innovation post-1850. Thus, 1850 is a useful cut-off point beyond

which all may be considered rudimentary and essentially unrelated to

modem retail structures and development patterns. It is therefore convenient

to speak about the innovation of fixed pricing in a late nineteenth- and early

twentieth-century con text and label this as one of the factors which underpin

contemporary retail forms. It provides a useful bullet-point for textbooks.

To have to integrate or at least consider Defoe s comments on the fixed

prices used by Quaker retailers around 70 024may be avoided if all before

1850 is conveniently considered part of some primordial retail swamp.

However, that is not to suggest that US academics have explored retail

history in considerable depth. Indeed, US academics have recognised the

major works of retail history which have been produced within the

UK.

In

his review of the three books on the development of the department store in

the US, Samson criticises the lack of contextualisation to be found within



S y d n e y ] a t 2 2 : 0 1 1 4 S e p

t e m b e r 2 0 1 5


9/16

8

T H E E M E R G E N C E O F M O D ER N R E T A I LI N G

US and notes the broader perspectives adopted by U academics

and in particular

n

their consideration of retail history.*

The 1850 divide within the history of retail development within the UK

has not been established as an impermeable boundary, as Scola has noted

with reference to food retailers and

producer- retailer^.^'

The debate on the

changing market importance of these two forms of retailer has been

differently interpreted by Clapham, Jefferys, Blackman, and Davis, and

further developed by Wild and Shaw, with reference to Hull, and in this

publication by Hodson, with reference to L a n ~ a s h i r e . ~ ~

Within this historiographical context, where the development of large

store retailing was considered appropriate and valuable, co-operative

retailing has emerged as an appropriate focus for study. Clearly, this theme

has been influenced by a wider socio-economic interest in the issue of co-

operative activity, but it has contributed considerably to the debate on retail

development, not least with reference to the decline in co-operative retailing

in the face of multiple store retailing since the 1940s. Again, the chronology

of development has focused on the period after the mid-nineteenth century,

and in particular the work of the Rochdale P ioneers from 1844. However,

as Bamfield demonstrates in this publication, while the Rochdale Pioneers

may claim an important place in the development of co-operative activity at

the consumer level, the bread and flour societies of the late eighteenth and

early nineteenth centuries had already adopted many of the principles and

operating practices of the co-operative movement as it developed after

1850. These societies were not isolated and unconnected instances of co-

operative activity. As Bamfield notes, some were still active when the

Rochdale Pioneers had established their society. Indeed, the Sheerness

society was to develop into a general co-operative retail operation.

Bamfield provides an interesting study of a co-operative retailing which

encapsulates many of the features and characteristics of later forms. As he

notes, these co-operatives were not providing food to the poorest groups in

society as the subscription rates would have prevented such groups from

joining. They were formed by individuals who were able to manage the

distribution system to their advantage and were prompted to d o so because

of its limitations at times of bread shortages.

These were societies which were able to sustain their existence.

Societies were able to sustain decades and even a century of trading activity.

These societies,

it

would appear, were, at least in part, the product of

changing distribution patterns within the economy as a whole, both of a

long-term and a short-term nature. In the long term, the better movement of

goods nationally and internationally was creating scarcity of product where

none was usually expected and, in the short term, the conditions between

1795 and 1816 gave particular purpose to the establishment of societies.



S y d n e y ] a t 2 2 : 0 1 1 4 S e p

t e m b e r 2 0 1 5


10/16


11/16

10

T H E E M E R G E N C E O F M O D E R N R E T A I LI N G

Bamfield s studies develop an understanding of the development o f the co-

operative m ovement.

Purvis contribution to this volume sheds light on the relationships

which existed between retailers and suppliers in the latter half of the

nineteenth century and the market power which these relationships gave, or

failed to give, different forms of retailing. It therefore not only shows the

demands and tensions within the co-operative movem ent but also illustrates

the importance of channel relationships within the comm ercial environment

of the period.

It

shows how retail co-operative product sourcing integrated

the societies far more with the general distribution systems than has been

previously assumed. Indeed, as Pumis notes, this integration within the

wider distribution system may have been a distinct attraction to consumers

who wished to have access to products within the co-operative store which

they would otherwise have had to source from other retailers.

The theme of individual organisational experience is taken up by Shaw

et al. who consider the structural and spatial trends which are an important

key to understanding the development of retail forms. They consider these

issues with reference to firm-level studies and their work in this area. They

note the need for a closer and better understanding of spatial and structural

issues within retail management studies. In this, they have focused on an

important aspect of interdisciplinary research. Within retail management

studies, the organisation will inevitably remain an important starting point

for research; there has been, however, a distinct lack of contextualisation.

Shaw et al discuss research which has already been carried out

n

their

chosen area and detail future research which they have begun. They build

on the work which has been carried out on the development of retailing n

the UK within the period 1850-1950. It sheds light not only on the regional

but also on the national and even international nature of retail competition

within this period. The essay discusses the development of Marks

Spencer and Woolworth within the south-west of England and highlights the

research questions which this development poses. The essay, and the

research undertaken, represents an important and valuable attempt to bring

a combined historical, geographical and management perspective to the area

of retail business history.

Hodson s essay is concerned with the development of markets within

nineteenth-century Lancashire: it makes an important contribution to the

debate on the changing nature of retailing within the industrial period and

how perceptions need to be modified. A s Hodson notes, markets have been

traditionally associated with pre-industrial economic environments;

however, the essay illustrates that detailed consideration of retail

environments shows that the picture is far from simple. In this, therefore,

the essay helps to redefine the interpretations that have emerged on retail



S y d n e y ] a t 2 2 : 0 1 1 4 S e p

t e m b e r 2 0 1 5


12/16


structural change in the mid-nineteenth century. As Bamfield s and

Fowler s contributions show, retail forms pre-date recognised periods of

developm ent; similarly, Hodson s essay shows how retail forms remain

important to the distribution system long after the supposed value of those

forms has disappeared.

Hodson s essay is also of value when considered together with Morris

essay on Italian retailing, in that it illustrates the role of regulation and

public authorities in the development and restriction of retail activity.

Likewise, Hodson provides a valuable perspective on the competition which

existed between different retail forms in the period but also the CO-existence

which is evident.

Hilton s essay considers the development of a retail trade. In this, it

illustrates the fundamental changes which occur within a single retail trade

to the extent that the operation becomes a very different comm ercial entity.

One of the fundamental weaknesses evident within the management

literature on retail change is the failure to appreciate fully the changing

qualities of a retail trade within the historical commercial environment.

Hilton directly considers this issue with reference to the specialist

tobacconist between the mid-nineteenth century and the mid-twentieth

century. In essence, Hilton discusses the de-skilling within the tobacconist s

trade which occurred during this period. In this, the article describes a

process which was also occurring in other trades. Hilton describes the

tobacconists dilemma. Despite their best efforts, specialist tobacconists

found themselves with limited room for manoeuvre, as a changing customer

group, and the commercial power of large manufacturing firms, who,

through their market presence, were able to inform and influence consumer

tastes, thereby redefined the tobacconists role for them.

Morris essay takes this publication beyond the

UK

environment, but

also identifies important themes which are relevant to the development of

retailing throughout Europe. The essay is concerned with the Italian

retailing sector between 1922 and 1940 and the Fascist government s

attempt to discipline the sector. In this, it has in important message, not

only for the development of retailing in the Italian environment, which

remains a pertinent issue within retailing today, but also draws attention to

the ef icien cie s which do or do not develop within channels of distribution.

One of the retail techniques commonly associated with the

modernisation of

UK

retailing in the late nineteenth century was the

adoption of fixed pricing and clear labelling within the store. This issue is

considered by Morris in the Italian context. He shows how this issue was an

important aspect of the regulating authorities attempts to alter retail

practices in Italy. Likewise, the issue of shops per head of population, which

has been an important aspect of econom ists interest in retailing? provides



S y d n e y ] a t 2 2 : 0 1 1 4 S e p

t e m b e r 2 0 1 5


13/16

2

T H E E M E R G E N C E O F M O D E R N R E TA IL IN G

an informative parallel. In this, Italy provides a useful comparison with

developments in the

UK

in terms of how two markets subject to similar

pressures have experienced different historical structural developments.

The essay also shows how the Italian market was influenced by

innovations from outside Italy and how these innovations were exploited

within the country. The development of the prezzo uni o stores are a

valuable example of the different fortunes of internationally exploited

innovations, both in terms of the time at which they were exploited (see

Shaw

et

al on Woolworth and Marks Spencer in the UK) and how they

fared within the market.

Morris work is also extremely valuable in that it addresses the issue of

public policy and regulation within retailing. While this area has been

considered within the retail management environment, notably by

Boddewyn with reference to Belgian retailing, O it is an area which demands

greater attention and an historical perspective.

The essays in this publication, therefore, provide consideration of the

structural development of retailing both before and after the 185

watershed. The research shows that the comparative lack of retail business

history has produced a distorted picture of development and that retail

management theories have contributed to this picture in an attempt to

establish a management framework within which to understand the dynamic

of retail change. These essays clearly illustrate that work needs to be carried

out which considers retail change on the local or regional level so that

unnecessary misinterpretations of national trends are avoided, and on the

international level so that illuminating comparisons may be made across

national boundaries.

The developers of large retail malls will place large units at the end of

walkways in order to anchor the mall and build traffic flow along those

walkways. Between these anchors and at the intersection of walkways

designers will place a focus for consumers using the mall. This focus often

takes the form of a design feature and restaurants. It is tempting to see retail

business history within the context of a mall, with four anchor disciplines

and hence the need for a focus at the intersection of the four walkways. The

anchor disciplines of history, geography, econom ics and m anagement have

already contributed to the development of retail business history, but, as yet,

the contribution has not created a true meeting of minds. From their

experience of editing this publication, it is evident to the editors that, while,

through its own development, retail management is able to accommodate

n

economics and historical-geography perspective, there remains a



S y d n e y ] a t 2 2 : 0 1 1 4 S e p

t e m b e r 2 0 1 5


14/16


3

considerable gulf between history, and hence historical methodology, and

the methodologies employed within retail management. Ideally, these two

disciplines need to build a greater volume of traffic between them.

However, in reality it is recognised that this may be a considerable

undertaking and that it will require a greater mutual understanding of the

two fundamental perspectives employed within each academic area.

It is not surprising that retailing has attracted limited attention. Retailing

within society has a chequered history and poor reputation. The wasteful

luxury of the distribution trades is an ancient theme. Nystrom observed that

for Plato, in well-regulated cities, retailers were the weakest in body and

are unfit for any other work and that in Cicero s opinion retailing is

dishonest and baseY.jBenson has noted that retailing is the Cinderella of

occupation^ .^^

In the words of Davies

et

al.,

despite the economic and

employment significance of retailing there continues to be a widely

accepted and fallacious belief that retailing is only a secondary response to

economic prosperity and does not have a wealth-creating, employment-

creating role of its own . Socially, retailing is the bottom of the heap, the

last-chance saloon for employment, and, it would often appear, for

academic study.

Retailing has fallen between the two historical stools. It has not, in great

part, provided academ ics with major commercial enterprises to study, because

retail organisations, with some notable exceptions, have been traditionally

more localised in their market impact. Neither has it appealed to the school of

social history which has focused on the fortunes of the w orking class, except

in the context of the co-operative movement where it has attracted

considerable attention. Its petit bourgeoise associations, which Bechofer and

Elliot have recognised within a social-science environment, have perhaps not

proved attractive and deserving of the same attention.I4 However, in the

contemporary commercial environment, retailers are major commercial

entities with considerable power to influence the developm ent of those very

manufacturing operations which have previously attracted academic interest.

Likewise, even if retailers may rightly be considered essentially unproductive

and unattractive participants in the channel of distribution, essentially

dishonest and base , they are worthy o f consideration for this fact alone.

After all, political history would be a shallow stream if all of those who

qualified for such a description were excluded.

N O T E S

1 R. Pearson, British Business History:

A

Review of the Periodical Literature for 1995 ,

Business History Vo1.39 (1997), p 3



S y d n e y ] a t 2 2 : 0 1 1 4 S e p

t e m b e r 2 0 1 5


15/16


16/16


15

An Intimate History of Jewish Fa milies Who Built Great Department Stores (Ne w York,

1979); R. Hendrickson, The Grand Emporiums: The Illustrated History o f America s Great

Department Stores (New York, 1979).

A. Aldburgham, Shopping in Style: London fm m the Restoration to Edwardian Elegance

(London, 1979).

R Scola, Food Markets and Sh ops in Manchester, 1770-1870 , Journal of Historical

Geography, Vo1.1 (1975), pp.1534.

J. Clapham, An Economic History of Modern Britain (Cambridge, 1932); Jefferys, Retail

Trading;

J.

Blackman, The Food Supply of an Industrial Town , Business History, Vo1.5

(1963); D. Davies, A History of Shopping (London, 1966); Scola, Food M arkets ; M. Wild

and G. Shaw, Locational Behaviour of Urban Retailing during the Nineteenth Century: The

Example of Kingston upon Hull , Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers,

Vo1.61 (1 974).

P. Ford, Excessive Competition in the Retail Trades , Economic Journal, Vo1.45 (1935); P

Ford, Decentralisation and Changes in the Num ber of Shops, 1901 1 93 1 , Economic

Journal, Vo1.46 (1936); G . Akehurst, Concentration in Retail Distribution , Service

Industries Journal, Vo1.3 (1983); idem, Checkout: The Analysis of Oligopolistic Behaviour

in the

UK

Grocery Retail Trade , Service Industries Journal, Vo1.4 (1984).

J

Boddewyn, Belgian Public Policy Toward Retailing Since 1 789 (East Lansing, 1971).

Nystrom, Econom ics of Retailing, pp.48-9.

S. Benson, The C inderella of Occupations: Managing the Work of Department Store

Saleswomen, 1900-1940 , Business History Review, Vol.LV (1 981), p.1.

K. Davies, C. Gilligan and C. Sutton, The Changing Competitive Structure of British

Grocery Retailing , The Quarterly Review of Marketing, Vo1.9 (1 984), p. l.

F. Bechofer and B. Elliot (eds.), The Petit Bourgeoisie: Comparative Studies of the Uneasy

Stratum (Basingstoke, 198 1).



S y d n e y ] a t 2 2 : 0 1 1 4 S e p

t e m b e r 2 0 1 5

Date post:	06-Jul-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	muhammad-umar-raza
View:	221 times
Download:	0 times

Emergence of Modern Retailing

Documents