Management Fashion: Lifecycles, Triggers, and Collective Learning Processes Eric Abrahamson and Gregory Fairchild
Previous to this study, the primary focus of management fashion was on rhetorics (written and spoken supporting a singular technique). Institutionalized organizational forms and techniques. There has been very little research on why certain management fads become institutionalized and others do not. This research is guided by three questions; (1) what are the overall trends of the popularity curves of management fashions, and why do they take the shapes they do? (2) to what extent are management fashions' upswings and down-swings triggered and shaped by forces exogenous to the management-knowledge market, by forces endogenous to this market, or by both types of forces? (3) does fashionable management discourse evidence a pattern of real learning- carefully considered arguments triggering the onset of the fashion, with counterfactual evidence triggering its decline- or does the discourse evidence superstitious learning, emotional outbursts of unrealistic enthusiasm at the onset followed by disillusionment in the decline? Thesis
While most fads in management technique are short-lived some techniques become institutionalized and evolve and are reshaped to fits current fashions. Exogenous and endogenous forces shape the demand for management- knowledge entrepreneurs to constantly reshape and redefine rational management processes. Evidence
Abrahamson and Fairchild's study yielded findings that help contextualize the concept of management fashion. Lifecycles of a management techniques typically follow a "short-lived, bell-shaped, symmetric popularity curve". Positive feedback on management techniques increases the discourse promoting that technique, making it more diffuse across organizations. Exogenous forces facilitate or suppress fashion niches and endogenous maintain niches. Superstitious learning suggests that...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document