• myGriffith
    • Staff portal
    • Contact Us⌄
      • Future student enquiries 1800 677 728
      • Current student enquiries 1800 154 055
      • International enquiries +61 7 3735 6425
      • General enquiries 07 3735 7111
      • Online enquiries
      • Staff phonebook
    View Item 
    •   Home
    • Griffith Research Online
    • Conference outputs
    • View Item
    • Home
    • Griffith Research Online
    • Conference outputs
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Browse

  • All of Griffith Research Online
    • Communities & Collections
    • Authors
    • By Issue Date
    • Titles
  • This Collection
    • Authors
    • By Issue Date
    • Titles
  • Statistics

  • Most Popular Items
  • Statistics by Country
  • Most Popular Authors
  • Support

  • Contact us
  • FAQs
  • Admin login

  • Login
  • Interlocking Directorates: Australian and New Zealand Comparisons

    Thumbnail
    View/Open
    TASAconference.pdf (145.9Kb)
    Author(s)
    Murray, Georgina
    Griffith University Author(s)
    Murray, Georgina
    Year published
    2000
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Abstract
    Interlocking directorates (that is, the links created by a director who is on board of more than one company or organization) are compared between two countries, Australia and New Zealand, and within countries by ownership. This article takes the top thirty companies of both countries to look at differences between their patterns of interlocking in 1998. The key finding is that the interlocks reveal a secondary productive capital political power layer but underneath this is a first tier of power, belonging to finance capital. The ownership of top companies in Australia and particularly in New Zealand is primarily in the hands ...
    View more >
    Interlocking directorates (that is, the links created by a director who is on board of more than one company or organization) are compared between two countries, Australia and New Zealand, and within countries by ownership. This article takes the top thirty companies of both countries to look at differences between their patterns of interlocking in 1998. The key finding is that the interlocks reveal a secondary productive capital political power layer but underneath this is a first tier of power, belonging to finance capital. The ownership of top companies in Australia and particularly in New Zealand is primarily in the hands of nominee companies owned by finance capital.
    View less >
    Conference Title
    The Australian Sociological Association 2000 Conference: Sociological Sites/Sights
    Publisher URI
    http://www.tasa.org.au/conference/
    Copyright Statement
    © The Author(s) 2006 Griffith University. The attached file is reproduced here with permission of the copyright owners for your personal use only. No further distribution permitted. For information about this conference please refer to The Australian Sociological Association's (TASA) website or contact the author.
    Publication URI
    http://hdl.handle.net/10072/1124
    Collection
    • Conference outputs

    Footer

    Disclaimer

    • Privacy policy
    • Copyright matters
    • CRICOS Provider - 00233E
    • TEQSA: PRV12076

    Tagline

    • Gold Coast
    • Logan
    • Brisbane - Queensland, Australia
    First Peoples of Australia
    • Aboriginal
    • Torres Strait Islander