Näytä suppeat kuvailutiedot

dc.contributor.authorAksom, Herman
dc.date.accessioned2022-09-21T08:42:22Z
dc.date.available2022-09-21T08:42:22Z
dc.date.issued2022
dc.identifier.citationAksom, H. (2022). Reconciling conflicting predictions about transience and persistence of management concepts in management fashion theory and new institutionalism. <i>International Journal of Organizational Analysis</i>, <i>30</i>(2), 430-453. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1108/ijoa-10-2020-2445" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1108/ijoa-10-2020-2445</a>
dc.identifier.otherCONVID_66414160
dc.identifier.urihttps://jyx.jyu.fi/handle/123456789/83298
dc.description.abstractPurpose Although drawing from neoinstitutional theoretical apparatus and ontology, management fashion theory is understood as a theory that explains the transitory nature of popular ideas and practices while institutional theory explains their stabilization, persistence and further institutionalization. In a nutshell, it seems that being opposed to each other, these two theories describe and predict different, incommensurable diffusion trajectories and organizational behaviour patterns. The purpose of this paper is to unify these two competing perspectives. Design/methodology/approach This paper makes an attempt toward further unification of management fashion theory with new institutionalism by offering an alternative understanding and conceptualization of institutional change and deinstitutionalization and by distinguishing emerging concepts from already popular fashions. Findings Most emerging concepts never achieve popularity and disappear while few of them achieve massive media attention and diffuse widely becoming new management fashions. Once these concepts have achieved a wide popularity institutional forces would favor them and lead to further institutionalization. Institutional change is understood not as a deinstitutionalization of existing management fashion in terms of erosion, discontinuity or disappearance but as a decline in its media coverage while media attention focuses on new fashionable concept. The former management fashion gets institutionalized, institutional change occurs in terms of shifting attention toward new fashion and diffusion and institutionalization cycle restarts. Institutional prediction of isomorphism and institutionalization as irreversible tendencies thus can be unified with MF prediction about the bell-shaped curves in fashions’ popularity. Therefore, postulates and predictions of management fashion theory can be derived from new institutionalism and vice versa. Practical implications The paper aims to cover, generalize and explain different trajectories of various management and organizational concepts, deducing theoretical propositions from both institutional theory and management fashion theory. Theoretical and methodological ideas offered in this paper can be helpful in future research on management fashions and diffusion. Studies on the evolution of management concept can benefit from proposed categorization and causal relationships between different stages of the life cycle. Originality/value Unifying seemingly conflicting and disparate perspectives and views allows making organization theory more coherent in terms of both explanatory power and ontological commensurability. Following other mature sciences, we share the same notion of progress, namely, the aim of achieving unification and demonstrating that different organizational theories still describe the same reality.en
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherEmerald
dc.relation.ispartofseriesInternational Journal of Organizational Analysis
dc.rightsCC BY-NC-ND 4.0
dc.subject.othermanagement fashion
dc.subject.otherinstitutional theory
dc.subject.othermanagement concepts
dc.subject.otherdiffusion
dc.subject.otherinstitutionalization
dc.subject.otherisomorphism
dc.subject.othermedia attention
dc.titleReconciling conflicting predictions about transience and persistence of management concepts in management fashion theory and new institutionalism
dc.typearticle
dc.identifier.urnURN:NBN:fi:jyu-202209214639
dc.contributor.laitosKauppakorkeakoulufi
dc.contributor.laitosSchool of Business and Economicsen
dc.contributor.oppiaineBasic or discovery scholarshipfi
dc.contributor.oppiaineLaskentatoimifi
dc.contributor.oppiaineBasic or discovery scholarshipen
dc.contributor.oppiaineAccountingen
dc.type.urihttp://purl.org/eprint/type/JournalArticle
dc.type.coarhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_2df8fbb1
dc.description.reviewstatuspeerReviewed
dc.format.pagerange430-453
dc.relation.issn1934-8835
dc.relation.numberinseries2
dc.relation.volume30
dc.type.versionacceptedVersion
dc.rights.copyright© Emerald Publishing Limited
dc.rights.accesslevelopenAccessfi
dc.subject.ysojohtaminen
dc.subject.ysoorganisaatiotutkimus
dc.subject.ysoorganisaatioteoriat
dc.subject.ysoinstitutionalismi
dc.subject.ysokäsiteanalyysi
dc.format.contentfulltext
jyx.subject.urihttp://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p554
jyx.subject.urihttp://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p7816
jyx.subject.urihttp://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p7815
jyx.subject.urihttp://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p7713
jyx.subject.urihttp://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p19406
dc.rights.urlhttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
dc.relation.doi10.1108/ijoa-10-2020-2445
dc.type.okmA1


Aineistoon kuuluvat tiedostot

Thumbnail

Aineisto kuuluu seuraaviin kokoelmiin

Näytä suppeat kuvailutiedot

CC BY-NC-ND 4.0
Ellei muuten mainita, aineiston lisenssi on CC BY-NC-ND 4.0