مقاله سال ۲۰۱۷

Enterprise policy has become a popular way for governments to meet social and economic challenges (Wright, Roper, Hart, & Carter, 2015). However, despite being hailed as a saviour that enhances economic growth, creates jobs, drives innovation and increases competition (Dennis, 2011), there is little evidence to indicate that enterprise policy has in practice raised business start-up rates or enabled growing firms to make a greater contribution to employment and economic growth (Beresford, 2015; Huggins & Williams, 2009). There is consequently a growing debate about the effectiveness of enterprise policy and the role of government intervention (Pickernell, Atkinson, & Miller, 2015).

iller, 2015). More recently enterprise policy formulation and the enterprise policy process itself has become prominent amongst scholars in understanding why enterprise policy is seen as ineffective (Arshed, Carter, & Mason, 2014). However, the focus has been predominantly centred on the implementation and evaluation stages of enterprise policy (Arshed, Mason, & Carter, 2016; Lenihan, 2011). The policy process is often seen as a ‘black box’ where the origins of policy ideas remain opaque, yet there is a discernible trend in policy-making towards opening up this ‘black box’. A growing recognition as to how policy ideas are an important element within the policy process has emerged but little attention has been afforded to the origin of such ideas (Radaelli, 1995). Lundstrom and Stevenson (2006) suggest that enterprise policy ideas can come from a wide range of policy influencers, including: political parties, politicians, lobbying groups, voluntary organisations, public opinion, public consultations, the media, banks, consortia, business leaders and think tanks.

This study responds to the call for the opening up of the black box by seeking out one set of policy influencers and investigating the role they play in the UK’s enterprise policy process (Arshed et al., 2014). It concentrates on think tanks as a starting point not only because of the importance in understanding the networks in which they provide ideas and assumptions in shaping how government tackles economic and social challenges, but also subsequently “think tanks in Britain have been credited with considerable influence on government policies since the 1970s” (James, 1993, p. 491). Furthermore, Mulgan (2006, p. 147) has argued that the civil service is “poorly designed for original thought” and little is known about how these “non-governmental components” of the policy advisory system operate (Craft & Howlett, 2012, p. 80). Drawing on institutional theory, the study seeks to understand the processes by which structures become established as authoritative guidelines for social behaviour (Scott, 2001). As people go about their work and implement policies and plans, these structures may change and the processes themselves may evolve (Burch, 2007). Institutional theory is the most commonly used approach to understand organisations (Greenwood, Raynard, Kodeih, Micelotta, & Lounsbury, 2011).