Witty invention or dubious fad? Using argument mapping to examine the contours of management fashion

This paper examines management fashion discourse based on the premise that management fashions are not neutral, but problematic. It grounds this premise on Abrahamson and Fairchild's (1999) observation that attributes the upswings of management fashion discourse to “emotionally charged, enthusiastic and unreasoned discourse”. Adopting this critical perspective, the paper conducts a careful analysis of faddish discourse in an attempt to understand the discursive ailments that would justify ascribing a diagnosis of “unreasoned” to this discourse. To achieve this goal, the paper employs the technique of argument mapping to examine and compare the structures of early discourse surrounding: (1) Business Process Reengineering (BPR) – typically now considered a fad; (2) Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) – an enduring, non-faddish IS discourse; and (3) Service Oriented Architecture (SOA) – a more recent discourse that is evaluated based on insights derived from comparisons of BPR and ERP. Findings from the resultant argument maps show conspicuous differences between BPR and ERP argumentation, which suggests an association between early argument structure and the faddish trajectory of discourse. Similarly, insights derived from ERP and BPR argument comparisons suggest that SOA is more likely to follow the faddish course of its BPR predecessor rather than the enduring track of ERP.

► Dearth of perspectives at early stages of research can lead to unreasoned discourse. ► Argument mapping proved to be a very effective technique for analyzing arguments. ► Academics should provide critical feedback in the fashion setting process.