Contributions in double-blind, peer reviewed journals:

Ajdacic, L.; Schoenberger, F.; Behr, J.; Cescon, F.; Hubrich, L.; Ischinsky, E.; Mazzucotelli, J.; Mrčela, L.; Pi Chholula, A.; Roy, C.; Salman, M.; Serrano, S.; Staven, H. D.; & Thakur, T. (2026). Taking stock: Elite Studies and Social Change. British Journal of Sociology. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-4446.70093

Abstract: This article provides a systematic synthesis of contemporary elite sociology through the analytical lens of change and stability. We distinguish between two types of change: change within elites, referring to transformations in elite composition, circulation, or internal characteristics; and change by elites, designating processes whereby elites reshape broader social structures, norms, or inequalities. Through a systematic review of 164 empirical articles published in leading sociology journals between 2000 and 2024, we demonstrate that contemporary elite sociology engages extensively with temporal perspectives, though in asymmetric ways. By systematically examining combinations of elite types and research topics, we reveal systematic patterns: studies addressing nationality emphasize evolution and shifting configurations, while research on kinship and class more frequently examines continuity and reproduction. Crucially, we find that broader social change associated with elites is predominantly portrayed as an unintentional consequence rather than the result of deliberate strategic action. Based on these findings, we outline four directions for future research: reversing the temporal lens to investigate understudied dynamics; situating elite processes along a temporal spectrum that captures both continuity and transformation; examining the degree of intentionality in elites as agents of change; and integrating forward-looking perspectives to understand how elites imagine and actively shape trajectories. This synthesis advances elite sociology by revealing how temporal perspectives fundamentally structure our understanding of power relations and by identifying critical gaps in how we conceptualize elites' relationship to social transformation.

Hubrich, L. (2025). Elite Outsiders? Power and Merit in the Biographical Narratives of Highly Successful Tech Entrepreneurs in Germany. The Sociological Review. https://doi.org/10.1177/00380261251391554.

Abstract: A central concern in recent sociological literature on elites is the disparity between the structurally unequal distribution of power resources in society and the minimization of that inequality in subjective accounts of elite individuals. This study contributes to the debate on this divergence in perception by drawing on a survey of 26 founders and CEOs of some of the largest and most influential start-ups in Germany – asking how these entrepreneurs narrate and legitimize their own path to an elite position. The main finding is that most of their (auto)biographical narrations ascribe the tech elite a status as outsiders to the established structures of the German economy. The surveyed entrepreneurs present their own elite status as meritocratically earned by emphasizing either their non-elite social background or their maladaptation to traditional elite career paths. In this study, it will be argued that their self-stylization as outsiders is best understood as a symbolic reaction in the larger context of the overall fading legitimacy of established economic elites. However, to be persuasive in appropriating and subverting the social figure of the outsider for themselves, these narrations necessarily ignore existing structures of inequality in the tech sector. This omission is especially glaring considering the exclusion of women from positions of power in the German tech sector, which this article critically juxtaposes with the dominant narratives in the field.

Hubrich, L. & Staab, P. (2024). Eliten der Digitalisierung. Führungswechsel in der deutschen Wirtschaft? Berliner Journal für Soziologie, 34(3), 309-337. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11609-024-00533-4 

Abstract: In the political economy, digitalisation is typically understood as disruptive dynamic, as new and established players compete for control of digitalised value chains. This article undertakes a first structural analysis of the elites in this field in Germany. The study analyses the CVs and networks of 254 individuals who occupy key positions in the context of the digitalisation of the German economy. It examines to which extent the coordination and personnel structure of the field is shaped by the logics of transnationalisation and financialisation. In some places, an adaptation of reproduction strategies to the changed rules of digitalisation can be observed: for example, in the increasing prevalence of short stays abroad or the growing importance of financialised management skills in the new economy. However, the cornerstones of German elite reproduction remain untouched. In contrast to sociological considerations which already expected a loss of importance of national elites in the context of globalisation, the following is evident: Firstly, a national industrial network of top managers continues to exist in Germany’s digitalised economy, which is integrated via supervisory boards as well as advisory bodies and association structures. Secondly, hardly any foreigners have been able to move up into the digital elite and formative career steps take place predominantly in Germany. Transnationalisation and financialisation have found their way into the personal careers of digital elites in Germany, but to a rather limited extent, especially in the industrial core. Thirdly, characteristic features of the German elite formation continue to dominate – such as careers at home, studying at German-language mass universities, or the possibility of careers based on technical expertise. These results suggest that the traditional elites of the German economy, by incrementally adapting their reproduction strategies, will retain their positions in digital capitalism.

Hubrich, L. (2023): Industriepolitik als Elitenkonflikt. Big Tech versus Industrie 4.0? Momentum Quarterly, 12(4), 211–223. https://doi.org/10.15203/momentumquarterly.vol12.no4.p211-223

Zusammenfassung: This contribution shows how the shift in industrial policy in Germany can be understood against the backdrop of emerging conflicts among elites. Such conflicts arise from the increasing dynamism of the political economy under digital capitalism, whose logic of ownership is spreading to other sectors of the economy. In this context, industrial policy alliances are forming among established companies, with government support. This article does not view such collaborative efforts as purely defensive measures taken by otherwise helpless German industrial companies, but rather examines them to uncover the power interests underlying them. In projects such as “Industry 4.0,” well-established patterns of corporatist cooperation are invoked to establish legitimacy for industrial policy support. This marks a break with the previous strategic orientation of German companies toward globalized markets, which, until just a few years ago, was still predominantly linked to calls for neoliberal deregulation.

Book chapter and book review:

Hubrich, L. (2025). Die Beharrlichkeit der ‚old boys‘. Rezension zu „Born to Rule. The Making and Remaking of the British Elite“ von Aaron Reeves und Sam Friedman. Soziopolis – Gesellschaft beobachten. https://www.soziopolis.de/die-beharrlichkeit-der-old-boys.html 

Hubrich, L. (2024): Die politische Ökonomie der ‚guten Kapitalgesellschaft‘. In: Bettina-Rentsch/Marc-Philippe Weller (Hrsg.), „Die gute Kapitalgesellschaft“, Nomos, 31-52. doi.org/10.5771/9783748945512

Public Sociology:

Hubrich, L. (2025). Gibt es eine deutsche Tech-„Broligarchie“? Zentrum für Verantwortungsbewusste Digitalisierung (ZEVEDI) Verantwortungblog. Link

Hubrich, L. (2025). The distinct path of German tech elites. LSE Researching Sociology Blog. Link

Hubrich, L. (2021). Warum sind die digitalen Monopole so stabil? Der Freitag (Blog). Link

Hubrich, L.  (2021). Amazons Strategie: Macht durch Infrastruktur. Der Freitag (Blog). Ebenso erschienen in: 2022, „Kolleg Politik und Wirtschaft – Niedersachsen – neu Einführungsphase“, C. C. Buchner. Link

Conference talks:

2026. Who gets to run a billion-dollar company? Society for the Advancement of Socio-Economics annual conference, Bordeaux (online).

2026. Elite Outsiders? Power and Merit in the Biographical Narratives of Highly Successful Tech Entrepreneurs in Germany. Workshop ‚Moral Economies of Class Privilege‘, Lausanne (CH).

2026. Digitale Eliten in Deutschland. Soziologie einer kraftlosen Dynamik. Frühjahrstagung DGS-Sektion Sozialstrukturanalyse und soziale Ungleichheit, Potsdam.

2025. Elitäre Außenseiter? Lebenskonstruktionen hocherfolgreicher Unternehmer in der deutschen Start-up-Ökonomie. Mittelbautagung DGS-Sektion Wirtschaftssoziologie, Frankfurt an der Oder.

2025. Elite Outsiders? SASE annual conference, Montréal (CA).

2025. Eliten der Digitalisierung in Deutschland. Die Sozialstruktur der Rückständigkeit (mit Philipp Staab). Re:publica, Berlin. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mf5OyUXzF8I 

2025. Elitäre Außenseiter? Workshop ›Deskriptive Repräsentation und ungleiche Rekrutierungschancen für Eliten- und Führungspositionen‹, Leipzig.

2025. Elitennetzwerke in der digitalen Ökonomie Deutschlands. Frühjahrstagung DGS-Sektion Soziologische Netzwerkforschung, Köln.

2024. The Elites of the German Digital Economy & the problem of vitality in unequal societies. LSE sociology annual conference, London (UK).

2024. ‘Disruption’ of Economic Power Structures? The Persistence of Established German Elites in Digital Capitalism. SASE annual conference, Limerick (IE).

2024. Sozialer Zusammenhalt von ‚oben‘? Die Struktur des Feldes digitaler Wirtschaftseliten. Frühjahrstagung DGS-Sektion Soziale Ungleichheit und Sozialstrukturanalyse, Bremen.

2022. Industriepolitik als Elitenkonflikt. Momentum-Kongress, Hallstatt (AT).