I am now inclined, however, to extend my reasoning even 
further in this direction. The development and persistence 
of oligopolistic market structures over a long time 
can not have been without effect on the internal structure 
organisation and management of the concerns. Partly this 
concerns size, and its consequences. Partly it is a matter 
the 
of^aims and preoccupations of the management. From being 
concerned with production and sales their interest has 
shifted more and more to the concern with market power 
and domination. 
Owing to their size the concerns are burocratic and 
hierarchically organised. This has been a handicap for 
research and development because projects have to run 
through committees and become the object of departmental 
rivalries. The large concerns have been loosing research 
personel to smaller firms because the research workers 
dislike the hierarchies and the burocracy. It has been 
one of the lasting effects of the high employment period 
that the human factor has gained more weight in industry. 
The large concerns are invariably accused of inflexibility 
( for example in connection with the shift to smaller cars 
in U.S. ). The type$of manager which came to dominate 
in these concerns in the U.S. in the post-war decades 
are described as burocratic and adjusted to dealing with 
"big government" and large unions. (Business Week :The new 
managerial elite. Jan. 1985 ). 
The interest in market dominance and power which is mainly 
operated by mergers and take-overs has led to a shift from 
popduction to finance ( from a production point of view 
the mergers are rarely a success according to the views 
of experienced managers ). Some large concerns ( you can