Essays on Management Fashion Theory Literature review

Download full paperFile format: .doc, available for editing

The paper "Management Fashion Theory" is a great example of a literature review on management. Rogers and Abrahamson have developed different theories to explain their thoughts on management fashion. Nevertheless, each of these theories has various strengths, and weaknesses, as brought about by different individuals. Abrahamson’ s theory features are lifecycles, triggers, and common learning processes. On the other hand, Roger’ s diffusion theory features include innovation, compatibility, complexity, trialability, and observability. This paper intends to explore some of the features of Roger’ s theories, as well as Abrahamson’ s theory. It also examines the criticisms of the theories, as well as better ways of theorizing IT innovation.

The paper also seeks to analyze the main features of popular management literature and reasons for the failure of management fads. Key features of Roger’ s diffusionThe key features of Roger’ s diffusion theory include the considerable advantage of innovation, which means that each new idea is better than the old one it is being replaced. The second feature of theory involves measuring of the idea’ s compatibility with the already existing values, adopter’ s needs, and experiences. The third feature entails the degree of complexity, or the ease involved in the understanding of an innovation.

Lastly, the fourth and fifth connected features are trialability and observability (Rogers 1995). Trialability can also mean the degree of innovation implementation, while observability refers to the degree to which the innovation results are noticeable to others. A communication channel refers to the way in which information gets to an individual from another. Besides, these communication channels exist in two categories including interpersonal and mass media (Smith, Rainnie, Dunford, Hardy, Hudson, & Sadler 2002; Rogers 1995). McMasters and Wastell’ s criticisms of Roger’ s approachAccording to Grant (2009), social constructivist models are more significant as compared to the diffusion theory.

First, the diffusion theory does not consider the structure and the role of competition in any organization. Another limitation is that the theory does not consider marketing mix variables and competitive advantage. Additionally, it does not take into account allocation of resources and their influence on the pattern of diffusion in connection with the product cycle.

References

Abrahamson, E & Fairchild, G 1999, ‘Management Fashion: Lifecycles, Triggers, and Collective Learning Processes’, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 44, No. 4 pp. 708-740.

Benders, J & van Veen, K 2001, ‘What’s in a fashion? Interpretative viability and management fashions’, Organization, vol. 8, no.1: pp. 33–53.

Clark, T 2004, ‘The Fashion of Management Fashion: a Surge Too Far?’ Organization, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 297-306.

Corbett-Etchevers, I 2004, ‘A narrative framework for management ideas: Disclosing the plots of knowledge management in a multinational company’, Management Learning, vol. 42, no.2, pp. 165–181

Gatignon, H, & Robertson, TS, 1985, ‘A prepositional inventory for new diffusion research.

Journal of Consumer Research’, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 849-867

Grant, K 2009, Knowledge Management, An Enduring but Confusing Fashion’, The Electronic

Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 9 no. 2, pp. 117-131.

Kautz, K & Larsen, EA 2000, ‘Diffusion theory and practice Disseminating quality management and software process improvement innovations’, Information Technology & People,

vol. 13 no. 1, pp. 11-26.

Kieser, A 1997, ‘Rhetoric and Myth in Management Fashion’, Organization, vol. 4, no.1, pp. 49-74.

Lambkin, M, & Day, GS 1989, ‘Evolutionary processes in competitive markets: Beyond

the product life cycle’, Journal of Marketing, vol. 53, no.1, pp. 4-20.

McCabe, D 2011, ‘Opening Pandora’s box: The unintended consequences of Stephen Covey’s effectiveness movement’, Management Learning, vol. 42, no.2, pp. 183–197

Morris, T, &Lancaster, Z 2007, ‘Translating management ideas’, Organization Studies, vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 207–233.

Perkmann, M & Spicer, A 2008, ‘How are management fashions institutionalized? The role of institutional work’, Human Relations, Vol. 61, no. 6, pp. 811–844

Rogers, EM 1995, Diffusion of Innovations. Pp. 1-20.

Smith A, Rainnie A, Dunford, M, Hardy J, Hudson R, & Sadler D 2002, 'Networks of value, commodities and regions: reworking divisions of labor in macro-regional economies',

Progress in Human Geography, vol. 1, no. 26, pp.41-63

Download full paperFile format: .doc, available for editing
Contact Us