But I will try to convey why this piece is important. One of the main reasons firms grew through diversification was because of federal anti-trust laws which were enforced starting in the 1920s. The feds had mandated a limit on org growth within certain economic sectors, but could not prevent growth through diversification. Orgs with money to expand were forced to do so through new channels, and so some did. It didn't take long for others to catch on.
Diversification creates stability, and stability is the essence of long-term expansion.
This is what the US firms did. F. argues this changed starting in the 1920s with a rapidly changing market, the influence of marketing campaigns, and changes in federal law. So far, F' s argument has been an ecological one. Now he argues that shifts in the way organizational leaders saw firms led to diversification. Firms in the modern era no longer view themselves as operating in a particular business, but instead view any business as an investment that must pay off.